Slashdot Mirror
XPde Makes X11 Resemble Windows
Gentu writes "Here is another way of penetrating the Windows market, which might even prove more successful than the current efforts: XPde is a desktop environment that mimics the Windows 2000 look and feel and behavior. Currently on version 0.3, the team has re-created a number of applications from its Windows equivalents, including Explorer." T. cuts in: It looks like they've made a lot of progress since this project was last mentioned.
I see the red bar, and I don't even subscribe! Why pay?
cool, now you can run xeyes in win2k.
I hate sigs.
why copy a worthless gui?
I thought people used Linux so they would not have to deal with the Windows horrid GUI? Oh wait, I was right. People want something that they can customize.
I don't see who this helps.
gotta be a slow news day.
That's disturbingly accurate. Different enough to avoid the Microsoft litigation hounds? That remains to be seen. If anyone knows a way to extract the network info module or a project like it (like shown here) please respond.
...and certainly there is much demand for this - me, for example, who likes to talk up Linux but after years and years of Microsoft brainwashing, I still use their operating system because, like a abused child, I am have got way to comforable with it. But then again, I have invested in a lot of Microsoft specific apps, but I know there are alternatives. Someday, I will switch.
BUT I fear a giant lawsuit from the monster in Redmond. I hope that this project will be hosted from some fair haven, like Sealand or whatever. I hope that some excellent lawyers will come forth, pro bono. Mmmm, maybe this could be the first open source project managed and distributed by a peer to peer network?
I know a lot of older folks who get really used to the one system, and just want it to run better but look the same. If this runs better than regular windows but looks the same, a TON of people will find it accessible -- so long as program installation can catch up too, so installing a program is (more or less) the same/as easy. When I say easy, I mean click and it's on there.
stuff |
I thought that linux people prided themselves on not resembling microsoft. I don't see why people would make linux look like a crappy version of windows when they can just run windows. Just my thoughts.
In case you didn't know and it shouldn't be news to anyone, the Windows GUI sucks.
Wow, it bears a stunning resemblance.
I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
On my XP box, I have twice the physical memory of the system in your screenshot, yet the amount shown as available is nearly the same.
If you want 2000/XP users to feel comfortable, you Linux guys are going to have to make your system far less memory efficient. Or perhaps you could just divide the displayed available amount in half.
Well, that site is mimicking Windows in more ways than one. Anyone got a mirror?
This space intentionally left blank.
For all the ranting about Windows usability from Linux zealots why copy the GUI? Why not make your own GUI?
i wonder if they are going to include a bsod ???
They claim a pixel by pixel copy
This must clearly be illegal since Microsft has patented the Start button. (their screenshots do have a start button though the Windows flag logo has been replaced.)
I bet if it gets pulled to court, even linking to XPDe site will be banned. CmdrTaco can go to jail
.ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
Then using a theme for Gnome or KDE? If you say it's the taskbar stupid....welll, one could write a task bar or come pretty close with a theme or skin. Personally, with Style XP on XP I can get almost as much customizeability as Linux desktops. I say almost. There are always somethings that the KDE or Gnome bars can do that Windows can't. I even found one moking that drawing theme that was out a while back on the mac. I just wish there'd be more ports of Linux themes for StyleXP.
Gorkman
Re: people complaining about why make linux look like windows?
Because that is what people are used to right now.
So doing this, is embrace, and extend (since as we all know that linux is far more superior and more powerful than Windows). This strategy is in fact, how microsoft brilliantly overran so many other software markets in their quest to world domination. Fitting, now that we come back and use it on them as well.
Embracing and extending Windows, will beat them at their own game. Eventually, once people have moved over from Windows to 'Embraced Linux GUI' like the one in this article.. then they can migrate to (or just let them discover on their own) the good native linux GUI stuff a bit later on when they are more familiar..
That is the only way in fact, that linux will ever overtake the MS Windows desktop. Most non techies cannot easily make the (massive in their eyes) switch to a new desktop and OS. Embrace & extend works, is proven, and is a good strategy, and we should back it up in order to get people off the Monopoly when we can..
http://images.freshmeat.net/screenshots/32217.jpg
Personally, I think the MS GUI peaked at Windows 2000, and went decidedly downhill with XP. That's not to say that it was "ideal" with W2k, but certainly isn't the Fisher-Price-inspired-nightmare that the XP interface is.
MadCow.
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
Man, that looks like like Windows. But isn't the Windows "look and feel" copyrighted somehow?
I don't think there's anything wrong with the Win2k interface, WinXP maybe...
I fail to see why there is so much fuss over what's effectively just eye candy.
I don't believe that anyone will hold up these window managers up as the point of comparison between Linux and Windows which makes Linux the patform of choice. In particular these immitative ones. I just can't see "Use Linux - it's just like Windows" as being a particularly convincing argument.
What does this WM do that I couldn't do in the past?
or even:
What is the problem to which this is the solution?
Sure, it's a choice, and choice is good, but having a progress report on 10 different Linux disties and 10 different WMs every couple of months gets a bit boring after a while.
YAW.
Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
Why does Microsoft have it's death grip on the OS market? Because they average computer user is just too comfortable with Windows since 95, and possibly 3.x. It's not /.'ers that this is really targeted for.
What we should be really happy about is there is a clean XP desktop for X11 we can load on a *nix box to show to our bosses and managers to try to get them to make the *nix switch. Look how easy it is boss!!!My only concern is will the M$ demon come down and smash this for some copyright infringement or something stupid.
Anyone know what IP/copyright/trademark issues are invloved?
Maybe they'll manage to build a decent file manager. As much as I hate to say it, for MY USE, Windows file manager destroys all the Linux equivalents (Konqueror, Nautilus, etc.). I'm not saying that either one of those is bad, but both have problems that just put me off. For most of my file managing needs I use Midnight Commander, which sucks in an Xterm. I actually can see the use of copying XP's interface. Unlike most here, I'm a REAL WORLD computer user (that was a joke. Laugh.). The people that I know freak out if one of their icons goes missing. There's no way they'd ever learn how to use Gnome. But if you take a distro like Knoppix and throw a familiar face on it, they might change their minds.
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
They screens look gorgeous. I don't know how they can use the copyrighted elements from Microsoft, but they look great.
Here is a real screenshot mirror with all the screem shots included. Thumbnails and full size:
Screen Shot Mirror
The server even help up as well as Win2k (ducks).
Seriously though, Why? If you want Windows, use Windows. Better OS behind the GUI? Hell, 2k/XP aren't *that* horrible, especially just for desktop uses.
Is there a reason so many people are trying to get joe sixpack to use *nix instead of Windows? I'm not an elitest holier than thou 'cause I know a bunch of arcane commands freak, it just seems to me if you want a Windows GUI Windows just makes more sence. Why copy them? Are we going to go as far as to make look alike replacments for most of the more popular Windows apps?
It just all seems silly to me. *shrug*
Slapping new paint on X won't make it commercially viable anymore than slapping new paint on a broken down barn will turn it into a luxury condominium. You'd be just as likely to make money trying to sell software gizmos that make Windows look like KDE or Gnome.
The world is replete with great free and open software. and it's a good thing that it's free, because it is also essentially unsellable. Take the hint: Consumers expect less when something is free. Stop making pointless cosmetic interface changes and try to build some apps that people are willing to buy.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Because that is what really gets me in the mood to work.
If you got a $100 bill, put your hands up...
A lot of people will complain that linux shouldn't be copying Windows, but should be innovating. As someone who spends a lot of time using both systems, I am more comfortable with the Windows GUI than any of the linux desktops I've used. Maybe it is just because I have been using it since Windows 95, and the linux interfaces are all so different. No matter why I prefer it, the look and feel of an OS actually plays a large part in how much I like it.
I love the backend of *nix, but could never stand any of the desktops enough to use it as my primary OS. With this project, I can have an OS with a nice backend AND an aesthetically-pleasing, usable front end.
Sure this isn't innovating, but consider what is required to come up with a good GUI. Microsoft spends a LOT of money doing research to see what people like in a GUI, whereas linux innovation is often the result of one developer deciding, "Hmm, this feature is cool - I'll make a window manager do that". It isn't really reasonable to expect a better (for "normal" computer people) GUI from a group of developers than a company doing actual research.
Unfortunately, the server stopped responding after I got the home page, but the few tiny shots there show things like the Display control panel (an interface I really like and have wanted in linux for a long time), and explorer. If they have a few more control panels (Add/Remove programs, Network connections, and a subset of System), this might really be enough to get me to switch my primary OS.
My server
I Can't Believe It's Not Windows!
Now, instead of duplicate sotries, SlashDot will call them "updates." I'd say we should check up on them in a few hours to see how their doing.
I may have a few quibbles with the Microsoft GUI but two things that I seriously lack in Linux is consistent behaviour for copy/paste commands and working (as in "no configuration needed") keymappings/character encoding for my national characters in _all_ applications. This has never been a problem in any windows version (counting all the way from 3.0).
Why doesn't anybody mimic that?
okthxplzdrvthru
(since as we all know that linux is far more superior and more powerful than Windows)
How so? I admin both (in addition to HP-UX and Solaris), and have no idea what "far more superior" or "more powerful" actually means. If you're talking about remote administration, I don't see the relavance to this article.
and we should back it up in order to get people off the Monopoly when we can
Why? I don't particular care what OS someone else is running. If there was a clear and convincing reason to use Linux instead of Windows, people would.
This could be huge for Enterprise and Government customers who are thinking of switching (what with the economy the way it is and companies/governments wanting to cut costs) and one of the hurdles they might bring up is that switching would require re-training people based on the GUI alone. This essentially eliminates that. There would obviously be some re-training necessary, but when I saw these screenshots, I started laughing! It looks incredibly like Windows! It looks as though it would considerably lessen the learning curve for new users. Great work guys! Keep it up!
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
I read through all the comments about how horrid the Windows XP GUI is... and didn't understand until I remembered that whenever I'm forced to use XP, I set the GUI to 2000/98 mode.
Really, the whole XP GUI is just a theme that takes up a lot of RAM and CPU cycles and slows down the whole damn PC without providing any great benefit.
By the way, for those who care to count, you can add another Windows tech / user who is in the process of switching to Linux.
Most people moving over to BSD or GNU/Linux systems do it because the are SICK with Windows. ;-)
Note to self: get smarter troll to guard door.
What does this WM do that I couldn't do in the past? If you've used Linux for a long time, not a damn thing. If you haven't used it and are interested in doing so, but don't want to learn a whole new way of doing things, it does a lot. Of course, the instant reply is "But it's Linux, not Windows. Everything IS different." To which I say "That's not the point. The point is, not everyone was born with a UNIX manual rammed up their bum. Some people didn't start using computers until AFTER MS dominated the market and haven't used a computer with anything but Windows. For them it's a matter of what they can do NOW, not what they CAN DO ONCE THEY LEARN HOW." Which gets the reply "Yeah.... but... Linux rules all." Then you smack me in the head with a stuffed Tux and run off. What is the problem to which this is the solution? User fear. Some people that want to try Linux are afraid to because jumping from Windows to even KDE is a huge step (and one I did just recently, so I know how it is). And from Windows to Window Maker? Forget it. It's an intermediate level and nothing more. IMO, at least.
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
Bash Microsoft, get a cookie!
Explorer
Go bring it down
Of making an intereface that looks like windows, when you can just use windows instead?
I mean, people use linux for whatever reason, but for most it's by choice and not necessity. So if it's not necessary to use it, but they still do, and then emulate the windows intereface, you might as well just choose to use windows instead of going through that whole hassle.
Why do so many people think that the Windows GUI is so good? It's awful from a usability perspective. For example:
1)Fitt's law violations - start button on Win2k doesn't stretch to the bottom left hand corner, context menus popup just to the right of the mouse cursor etc.
2)sub menus pop-up - sub menus are unusable on windows compared to KDE3/MacOS due to the annoyingly narrow region in which the sub menu remains activated
3)Maximize/close buttons right next to each other and tiny. Why?
4)Double-click on a file too slowly and suddenly you're renaming the file. Huh?
I could keep going. The way to get Windows users is surely to show them a better GUI under Linux, rather than copying the terrible Windows GUI.
Now that X11 resembles windows Steve Jobs will stop calling it "ten-eleven".
Repeal the DMCA!
now you can install linux on your girlfriends computer and she will never even notice ...
This is even worse than the aqua interface brought down by apple. I wonder how long it will be before Microsoft unleashes the rabid dogs.
Give their server a break, and use the Google cache instead. :)
Enjoy
That's cool and stuff, but tell me please is there a Cygwin port of this thing so I can run it in XWin to get native windows look and feel ? Oh wait... :)
- Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
- Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
Here I am using litestep as my windows2000 shell and it looks exactly like KDE. Go figure..
Make Windows looking environments, they can.
Withstand the slashdot effect they can not.
I feel the force is not so great in this one.
-- Yoda.
Note to self: get smarter troll to guard door.
desktop proeprties
explorer
notepad
start menu
My server
Most of you MS trolls love to point out that MS 'stole' its interface from Apple *(who may have picked it up from Xerox) and you'll use nothing but Linux -ah ha if your face Bill- Now you're copying the interface? What lazy uncreative hypocrites. Why would I care to change when I have it right here??? Cost?? No way, I have hundereds of custom applications that would never run in linux non do I want to waste the time trying. Why don't you copy apple's OSX while you're at it? I don't know what people are trying to prove.. I imagine that you're trying to lure Windows users into a familiar environment, but what have they gained? Moral ground? Doubtful since you're no better than the beast you claim to hate by adpoting its standards. Be innovative and show me differances worht using.
Didn't these people learn from the myriad projects that have been smashed by Apple for copying just the look and feel, not even making everything look EXACTLY the same as Windows. If Apple would do it, what makes them think Microsoft wouldn't?
That whole project is a silly, stupid waste of time, because the lawyers are going to erase it from the face of the Earth. And they should, just as they should if Apple had copied the Windows 2000 interface for MacOS X and replaced the Windows logo with an Apple, as these people appear to have done. Get with the real world here.
Without reading the article, I have this to say. I am trying to GET AWAY from that look. For me it represents all things wrong and I'd rather go through a learning Kurve than soil my choice of OS.
The developers need to get over the Stockholm effect!
The term "Stockholm Effect" was coined in the early 70's to describe the puzzling, completely unpredicted reactions of four bank employees who became victims of a hostage situation. Specifically, on August 23, 1973, three women and a man were taken hostage in one of the largest banks in Stockholm, Sweden by two ex-convicts. They were held for six days by these ex-convicts who continuously threatened their lives but also showed them what they later reported as small kindnesses during their detention. To the world's surprise, after a relatively short period of time, ALL FOUR OF THE HOSTAGES STRONGLY RESISTED THE GOVERNMENT'S EFFORTS TO RESCUE THEM and and WERE QUIT EAGER TO DEFEND THEIR CAPTORS
I'm not sure how necessary the 'look and feel' aspect, in and of itself, is really necessary. What Linux (or, insert favorite alternate graphical OS/desktop environment here) really needs is more polish on the various little un-glamorous things that make the desktop environment, as a whole, sing. I've got my wife happily using gnome 1.4 on RH7.3, and the differences in interface operation don't bother her. What would make life more pleasant for us would be various other things like, oh, just off the top of my head:
(1) as 'root', I install a gnome app, but it goes into some completely *screwball* menu location that I removed long ago, only to show up again, with no choice(s) for me. Contrast with the install-shield stuff that gives me a choice based on currently existing menu layout.
(1a) in response to "but gnome application RPM's don't facilitate this" type responses... maybe that should go on the list too.
(2) as a normal user, a way to possibly install a self-only gnome app somewhere in the home directory (at least for the programs that aren't doing anything that needs root-level authority to do stuff). See (1) regarding giving choice of install location (both in filesystem and on the user menu)
(3) a solid network browser a la network neighborhood.
I could list off a few other gripes too (drag/drop and other non-visual things), and yes, I'm aware that such things Are Being Worked On (tm?), but this has been the case for a while. And saying "have you tried KDE?" isn't necessarily valid here... I've "started over" to get our boxes running gnome (as opposed to win'98) and I've got little motivation to "start over" again... so maybe that makes the above a bit gnome-specific (probably true). All this mainly to say that there are issues that are causing annoying little problems, and they aren't tied up specifically with how closely the desktop / window manager "mimics" the appearance of windows. Don't get me wrong, you'll get linux off my system after its pried from my cold, dead hands. (Oh, and before the "get off your butt and contribute" flamers get going, I do have a project or two in the works, thanks very much.
There's plenty of possible innovation in window managers. Radial menus show real promise, but we don't yet have a decent radial menu window manager, for example. And there are a lot of other examples.
Slavish imitation of somebody else's system is just stupid. If you prefer that system, go out and get it.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
"Why does Microsoft have it's death grip on the OS market? Because they average computer user is just too comfortable with Windows since 95, and possibly 3.x. It's not /.'ers that this is really targeted for."
So does that make it a comfort grip?
|rimshot|
They are striving for an XP-like desktop, not a 2000 one.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Real world example of how a stupid windows theme is good:
I just opened up a new office with a friend of mine. Not one bit of MS anywhere in our office - it's all Linux and open source. Getting to the point - my partner can use a computer for all the necessary office tasks, but she is only a user. She is not even remotely computer savy - installing a windows program would be a nightmare for her!
Anyway, I set up her account to use the Windows XP look-a-like theme for KDE - Fischer Price colors and all. When I showed it to her, she barely raised an eyebrow. The only questions she has asked so far are about changing wallpaper and enabling email notification sounds (and she also wanted to know if Evolution would put little smiley icons in her email like AOL's software). Other than that, she just plugs away.
I wouldn't be caught dead with an XP look-a-like on my desktop, but they serve a purpose. Three years from now, my partner will have lost all recollection of how things work in windows - until then, the windows theme helps gloss over some of the differences.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
For (3), I find gnomba works just fine. I had to change the scan method to 'IP Scan' and set the IP range manually, other than that, it is straightforward.
Actually, it mimics the Windows XP look and feel and behavior, not Windows 2000. (Hence the name XPde -- "XP desktop environment.")
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
programs install into "Program Files", it makes sense, whats all this /dev crap?!?!?!? people will NOT switch to linux until it fucking makes sense, i use computers alot, linux is not a thing you can just casually pick up, you NEED someone to explain to you how the fuck the damn thing works.
Not only would it further Lindows' pursuit of capturing the Linux end-user desktop market, it would also be yet another opportunity for him to get Lindows in the news. MS is already suing the company over their us of the name "Lindows"; this would allow him to pool resources with the XPde team and possibly really win big (not just the use of the word, but also the look & feel).
Of course, we'd also have to put up with another article with his mugshot in it. Why does he always do that?
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technolog y/maney/2003-02-25-maney_x.htm
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the MS v. Apple thing got settled out of court: Apple agreeing to drop the suit in exchange for the notorious "five year deal" whereby Microsoft agreed to continue to develop Office, et al., for the Mac.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Yeah, i can see it now. My mother calls tech support at [major manufacturer].
She thinks she's using Windows because it looks like the last computer she used.
She's calling tech support because she her copy of Office doesn't install for some reason - yes, she can see the install disk in Explorer, Control Panel's Add/Remove Programs is there, but alas, she can't install it.
Why on Earth would we want to increase the confusion AND admit that Windows is the de facto desktop?!
There are 01 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and me.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm sure a lot of people will love this. I'm not sure it's really the right way to concentrate, though. I know a lot of people don't like learning new things, but I believe that most people are going to care more about the applications rather than the interface. Most newbies I've come across have no problem getting used to WindowMaker or KDE etc.. In fact most of the people I've introduce to Linux have surprisingly preferred WindowMaker to KDE or Gnome. People who have never used anything other than windows.
It's when they realize that they don't have the applications that they love, and the so-called "viable replacements" well.. suck compared to what they use on windows.
I love Unix. I'm an ex programmer and sys-admin. For the past 5 years I worked as both and concentrated on Linux, Solaris and OpenBSD. I'm a guitar teacher now because I got sick of the IT world but I still love technology and Unix with a passion and feel right at home when I'm using bash, vi, gcc etc.
But I use Windows on my desktop.
I use Windows because of applications. I do a lot of sound recording and processing when I'm at home and I just can't find viable replacements for Cubase SX, Fruityloops, Cooledit Pro, Kazaa and not to mention I'm still hooked on The Sims and I like to know that if I walk into a software store I can take anything off of the shelf and bring it home and know that it'll work.
Worst of all I hate compiling software. Yeah I know funny since I'm a coder but seriously I don't have the time in a day to spend 3 hours trying to make a program that I download work on my system. I hate downloading an rpm and having it bitch about dependencies especially dependencies that I can't satisfy.
It's not worth the trouble anymore. When I was 15 and started using Redhat 4.something it was fun and I flew. I picked it up and fell in love and I tried to convert everyone and their grandmother to Unix. But 6 years later I have a house to maintain, kids to raise, a wife to spend time with, a job to work at etc. When I sit down at the computer I expect to click a little button and have things just work. Like magic. I wanna click "download" and in 5-10 minutes be running the program. No compiling. No dependancies etc.
So to wrap all this ranting up. I'm just not sure how important a desktop enviornment that mimicks Windows is going to benefit newbies. I think applications need more thought and work first. If you have to compile it to work then it's just not worth it. If it only works on Redhat 7.2 and not Slackware then it's just not worth it. I know people realize that I just don't want to see that realization forgotten and lost.
</rant>
Windows is better than Linux. Get over it and get on with your lives.
I know that alot of Linux purists will think that this is horrible, but I really see no problem with it.
Actually this is just one more exammple of how extremely functional Linux can be compared to Windows.
It may not be for everyone, even I would much rather use KDE on X11 rather than XPde. But I would not fault someone for chosing to use it (or any other desktop or window manager).
In the end it all depends on what the user prefers to use. The more options, the better.
-Cnik
The problem is that the DLL can be loaded into different virtual address in different processes and VC++ doesn't have -fPIC. After the code is relocated, there is not much of it that is still shared.
Not to diss the authors hard work but who would want the Windows look and feel? Its old, badly engineered and is a disaster from a humanistic view. Intuitive? Not bloody likely!
I can see that it could do some benefit the first period for a linux n00b but it already exists enviroments very alike Windows in linux.
Well, if people can put time into copying a terrible GUI maybe some other people will start making something better than Xerox did. The whole desktop analogy feels somehow out of date today.
HTTP/1.1 400
... why do Linux lovers constantly keep trying to emulate Microsoft's software? Whether it's the OS, the office suite etc etc it appears that by making it look/feel as good as a MS product is the aim and achieving it is a good thing!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
People come up to me and they say "where's your start button?" and I start crying, I don't know what to tell them.
I look, maybe it's on my other virtual desktop, no. I raise a window by hovering over it, not there. I windowshade all my windows - nothing!
You're your own best interface expert.
Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!
I feel my P3/128M RAM desktop at work runs twice faster after switching XP to "Windows classic" UI. I figure it will go supersonic if I get rid of the rest of the UI bloat.
"Most non techies cannot easily [switch]" ...
I've heard this claim before but would be interested to see research or evidence to back it up. I've worked with unrepresentative small groups who have migrated to Linux from Windows with just about zero effort. My own organisation does quite a lot of training for people who are mostly Windows users but we put Linux desktops in front of them - they seem to adapt very rapidly.
Now it could be that they aren't the regular Windows user, or it could be that the received wisdom that 'windows users will find it hard to switch' is just plain wrong.
So I'd LOVE to see some hard evidence on this one, not simply assertions that it is so based on gut feel instead of research.
Anyone care to contribute?
This is one of my pet peeves about linux as a desktop OS. None of the developers and zealot users seem to understand that on a Mac or a Windows machine, you can cut and paste images, video clips, sounds, etc. This is what we are complaining about when we say that X11's cut and paste functions suck. I don't mind having two different systems (actually, it's kinda useful) I mind having two systems that both only work on plain text!
Try this:
Go to a windows system
Copy some formatted text in an IE window, and paste it into a Word document.
Copy an image from an IE window, and past it into a Word doc.
Now try doing the same thing on a Linux box. Doesn't work, does it? Put *that* in your X11 is superior pipe and smoke it. X11's cut and paste system is *brain* *dead*! It's not about keybindings, it's not about needing three button mice, it's about moving beyond flat effing ASCII text!
Sorry for the rant, but nobody ever seems to understand that to Mac and Windows converts, cut and paste is more than psting the right plain text into the right place most of the time.
0 1 - just my two bits
Great! It looks like Win 2000! Whoopee!
This is the problem wit the open source movement. All that is ever done is copy copy copy. Forget making it look like Win 2000... make it better and easier to use. And make apps that are better than those on Windows. An example of failure: GIMP is a knockoff one or two steps behind Photoshop. Make it better than Photoshop and I will use it. Make an operating system easier than Windows and get me software, lots of it, and I am there.
But hen again, until Photshop, Quark Xpress and After Effects are available for Linux there is nop chance of my conversion.
Later.
I don't think you know what a virtual machine is, and no, cmd.exe is not a virtual machine.
Also, what do you mean by a "true CLI"? Any shell on Unix/Linux and an optional terminal emulator that they may be running under are all programs like any other. They have no special privileges or powers that any other program wouldn't have. Believe me, I once wrote my own shell on Linux.
When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
"3) a solid network browser a la network neighborhood."
Sorry I'm too lazy to link (use Google), but what's wrong with LinNeighborhood? I find it extremely easy to use, particularly for what I want to do (finding ALL the file shares on my campus network quickly). It isn't an "all-in-one" solution, but it's perfectly capable of calling up Midnight Commander (which I love even in Xterm windows), or you can just use konquerer/nautilus once the share is mounted. Simple - not quite as easy as the windows Network Neighborhood, but arguably more powerful, particularly if your primary interest in the LAN is filesharing.
I'm the stranger...posting to
but will it run cygwin? I can't stand windows without having cygwin installed. ;-)
I do know what a true virtual machine, and when I label the MS dos emulator as a virtual machine, it's only because that's what I've read. Either way, it emulates DOS like other dos emulators do.
By true CLI, I mean that, the CLI is loaded first, and then GUI applications (Win9x, X11, etc.) are loaded on top of that.
I suggest trying xftree and the excellent xfsamba for an explorer replacement. Under debian, they can be found with the xfce window manager package.
I empathize with you, since a few weeks ago, I was trying to find a decent file browser for my low end laptop. Tried a few, but finally was happy with xftree.
It's a statement on the publics inability to cope with change, when you have good programmers and designers working to make good windowing environments (X) run bad GUI's (Win).
What a fucking waste of time.
catch (HumourFailureException e) { e.user.send("You, sir, are a humourless idiot."); }
Let's just install a bad GUI on a good X11 box. Why would anyone want windows UI, it's HORRIBLE and not user-friendly at all. The only thing I can think of is various idiots are so used to using it that it would save them the 10 minutes it would take to understand something like MacOS.
Seriously, the main reason to use XPde is to familiarize people already using Windows with a Linux environment. One guy I know, a complete anti-Linux zealot, got that way because his old crappy copy of Slackware didn't have all the drivers ready for his NIC. When he tried to fix things, he go so frustrated in not understanding the /etc confs (which are NOT that obvious to a non-*nix user) that he just gave up. Maybe, just maybe, he would've had half a chance if his distro included XPde or an XPde-like interface.
I had also made a previous post regarding how to improve Linux, and that was to basically migrate to the DLL and registry paradigms of Windows. The dependencies of packages you have to compile are ridiculous. Compiling is cool for those of us who have nothing better to do or want to modify or repair code. The rest of us just want a usable system. If I can't double-click on an RPM to install it, I don't even want to bother 99.9% of the time.
But I will put forth the most profound part of the equation. With a solid distro of Linux, XPde and WINE, one could potentially eliminate the need for Windows altogether for the biggest majority of users, particularly business users. Even if you wanted to use Evolution instead of Outlook and OpenOffice instead of MS Office, the amount of training for corporate organizations would be greatly reduced vs. moving people to an out-and-out Gnome or KDE GUI where people don't know what's going on. Particularly if Mandrake, with its outstanding installer, can integrate XPde and WINE, this could be the big break all the Linux geeks have been looking for. And the best part is that you don't have to give up your cron tab or ability to script operations easily in the back end when you want to. That's also partly the power of OSX (evolutionary gui, BSD back end), though there are other issues there that I won't get into.
One last thing - does anyone know whether the daemons are viewable as the equivalent of "System Services" in XPde?
Okay - I'll take the troll bait...
My wife has a non-technical background and is actually more of an anti-MS zealot than I am. Her reasons? Things tend not to work in Windows. Under Linux or OS-X things just work.
She doesn't need to install applications contantly.( Hopefully that'll be 1 more reason to keep me around). She doesn't browse networks etc - she primarily just uses it for email, web access and ocassionally typing a paper or playing dvd's or mp3 music. She's even learned how, on her own, to rip mp3's and organize her files logically.
Shifting back on topic now, she much prefers the style and appearance over KDE/GNOME, or OS-X calling windows "clunky". The others are more "artsy" ( her words ) and more pleasing to her.
There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
But heres the google cache of the screenshots page
-D
My 1 linux gripe is that certain X apps have serious usability issues at a resolution of 800x600 or below.
Using Galeon as an example:Go to settings/perferences, click.
Great, the settings pane is larger then the entire screen. No window bar, can't reach the close buttons. Argh!
Of course, just because of this, I have alt-shift-[hjkl] mapped to bignudge the window left-down-up-right. So, nudge the window down and to the left, and I see a maximize button. Click it. Expands to fill the entire screen again.
Now I'm not trying to pick on Galeon, its a fast browser for my older laptop, and allows me to browse without a problem on most web sites. However, apps like this are one of the reasons why linux isn't ready as a desktop for the masses.
Billy at Redmond had his OS at Redmond usable at 800x600 for a long time, and everything up to 2k was usable at at 640x480. (Haven't used XP, so I can't vouch for it). Now the 640x480 resolution is probably dead and buried for most new systems, but plenty of older systems are using it, and 800x600 is still the most optimal resolution for some new laptops, and plenty of older ones.
I'm sorry, but this is one of the areas where Linux is so far behind Windows that it is shameful.
Harsh word, but this is stupid. It assumes that users are too dumb to figure out a new, superior environment. Nothing could be further from the truth, especially not when it comes to the more recent windos GUI "innovations". Now that there isn't much left to steal, Microsoft tries to invent, and the result is pretty predictable - even windows fans I know hate it.
Copying the fat and ugly definitely passes on the wrong message.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
ROX is a desktop manager that isn't about mimicking any "desktop style", but focuses on usability issues - for example, it has (IMHO very good) solutions to the first two problems you mentioned.
In fact, I'd argue that it finally creates a Linux desktop that Joe Sixpack could be happy with. It doesn't spew an application's files all over the filesystem - instead it leaves them all inside the application's folder. In fact, double-clicking on the App's folder runs it! To delete a program, just delete that folder. Program preferences are stored in a Choices folder so that you can keep your preferences even if you delete a program.
And since you don't need to "Install" the program, you either move it to the system's "Apps" folder, or the "Apps" folder in the user's Home folder to install local or system apps. (BTW, as some may notice, it actually works very similarly to Mac OS X, which some people think is very easy to use. =) This makes managing the 'start menu' a non-issue. It also gives the user more power to manage their programs folder (i.e. create their own categories).
Check it out at:
http://rox.sourceforge.net
I've tried KDE and GNOME and while they look pretty enough, I never felt they were usable in the Mac or Windows sense. This desktop is definitely headed in the right direction... It may even convince me to put Linux on my PCs. I'm really surprised that most people haven't seen this yet!!
Sure, it requires apps to be modified (and it looks like many have already been), but sooner or later people are going to have to realize that this is far easier to understand for the desktop user. Linux (and Unix) were designed for server and terminal-based environments, not the desktop, so any solution will need to modify the current way of doing things. IMHO, this desktop addresses some of the most important issues and deserves more attention and support!
Yes, of course embrace and extend works. Let's turn this into a religious war. Users should be forced to switch to Linux.
Let any operating system stand on it's own merits. Users shouldn't be enticed and then forced. Sheesh, it's just an operating system, not a way of life.
It's the zealotry and idolotry that keeps the business users from using the system in the first place. I still hear the same GNU/Crying here on Slashdot after 5 years. Boo hoo, get back to coding. People are sick of using shoddy products, whether they come from Microsoft, Sun, IBM, or GNU.
One future, two choices. Oppose them or let them destroy us.
osnews mirror, XPde front page, and screenshots page.
The screen shots only are at this place
Is XPdes notepad 16-bit too?
The fact that most driver installs in Linux involve compiling a kernel module will be even worse.
Can't a wizard automate this process?
But you also don't want people to call for support because they can't change the resolution of their monitor to 800x600 (because they cannot see the fonts).
Like Windows, X11 allows the user to change the display's logical DPI, but unlike vertical market Windows apps, vertical market apps for the popular X11 widget sets seem to respond well to changes in the DPI.
Will I retire or break 10K?
/usr/bin/bsod
or
K Menu -> System -> Emulator -> BSOD for the graphically-minded running KDE.
I gotta tell you, having the security blanket of that app made switching a heck of a lot easier for me.
My legal education, in nifty podcast format
On a Mac, you just plug in the printer and print.
Say what? I'm not familiar with printing under Mac OS. Do all Mac printers that aren't expensive enough to speak PostScript speak the same language over the wire? Is there some sort of USB image output standard such that the printer sends a color correction profile and receives a bitmap image to print?
Will I retire or break 10K?
In that case, you don't know what "CMD.EXE" is; here's a free clue, it's NOT the same as COMMAND.COM. It's a real 32 bit process, which JUST HAPPENS to emulate some DOS commands.
CMD.EXE is a real CLI to Windows, in the same way that "bash" is a CLI to Linux; it's just that bash is more configurable and more powerful. CMD.EXE is most certainly NOT a virtual machine; start one up and compare the running processes to COMMAND.COM, which will start up an NTVDM.EXE process (which is actually the NT Virtual DOS Machine you have heard about).
NTVDM is also commonly found hanging out with WOWEXEC.EXE - this is the 16 bit Windows-on-Windows process which runs Win16 applications. Win64 on Itanium will use a similar mechanism to suport Win32, probably called WOWEXEC32 or similar.
Jon.
I agree with just about all of that. I use linux on servers, and would not consider anything else for myself. They just don't crash, and never give me a problem.
On the desktop however, it's much different. X is slow - it's slow to start up, it's slow to open new apps and it's slow when resizing windows (well, anything more than the terminal). Not just on slow machines either - my 2 workstations here have near identical specs (Athlon 2000XP, 768MB, GF4, different motherboards and HDs), but the XP machine is definitely snappier to use. It starts up in around 1/4 of the time of the Linux box (running RH8.0, modified quite a bit, and only desktop services running). Opening Explorer is instant, whereas Mozilla takes a good 10 seconds to load up the first time, and 3-4 on subsequent launches. And don't get me started with the Nvidia 3D accelerated driver crashing almost every day! The XP machine has yet to crash (though I have resinstalled it once as it started to become slow for some reason - maybe too much stuff installed).
Then there's apps that suddenly just quit and disappear - Konqueror under KDE is a favourite for this. The worst offender is my iMac with Yellow Dog Linux installed. It's an oldish machine now (400MHZ G3), and although the GUI is faster than when OSX was on there (I HAD to get something other than OSX on it, as it was too slow to be usable IMO) it takes 25 seconds to launch Mozilla, and Konqueror will often vanish or sieze up for no apparent reason! Oh yes, and Sawfish will occasionally quit, leaving me with a desktop full of borderless windows (the "fix" is to switch to TWM, then back to Sawfish).
Although I do keep trying with X every now and then (and I'll probably keep playing with the iMac as it's nice and quiet after my Athlons) I don't consider it close to Windows 2000/XP for the desktop user yet. For me desktop=windows and server=linux, and I can't see it changing any time soon...
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
Likewise if I were to start a clothing company, the first item on my agenda would be to make underpants that are exactly like Fruit of the Loom Y-fronts. Because that's what consumers are used to. It doesn't matter that you can make all sorts of underpants in different shapes and virtually everyone will understand where they're supposed to put their legs and hips, that you put your feet through these holes in this order, and pull them up. Oh no. Unless they look like FotL Y-fronts, people aren't going to buy them.
Otherwise "What's this?" they'll cry, as they see a slightly more roomy pair of underpants, with stitching in the right places for the comfortable, soft, material we'd be using to make them. "I don't understand this, I mean, where are my legs supposed to go? It's not obvious because it's a slightly different shape, and more roomy, and there's stitching in a slightly different pattern! I can't wear these!"
Now, ok, the cloned underpants are likely to fall apart as the underlying material used to build them doesn't actually fit with the FotL Y-front template, but that's a small price to pay. Who cares if Squiggleslash Underwear gets a deservedly poor reputation for making knock-off undergarments that fail even quicker than Wal*Mart's? I mean, the point is that people are DUMB! They're stupid! Just as they would never, say, understand a user interface like Apple's, because it's not like Windows, likewise they could never understand how to put on a pair of underpants that look slightly different to the Fruit of the Loom ones!
And, of course, by introducing these direct clones of FotL Y-fronts, we'll be making the world a better place. We'll be introducing choice. The choice between two identical pairs of underpants. Can you imagine what a great gain for civilization that will be?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
The parent is right on the money. If someone is happy using Windows and wishes to continue using it for the forseeable future, let them do so. You can try to convince them that Linux is better, or demonstrate to them how insecure Windows is, or offer them encouragement to switch over to using open source apps, but you can't force people to switch to Linux and then fob them off with "it looks like Windows 2000". If you try to do that then chances are they may well not be ready to handle "the Unix way" of doing things and will have to be switched back to Windows.
What the coders at XPde are doing is great and will probably help a few more people dip their toes into the Linux waters. However, it does not mean that we should all use it as an excuse to rush our families and friends into using Linux. You can point Linux out as an alternative, but switching someone over to Linux against their will can often have bad results in the long run.
Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".
Very well put. Using Microsofts own strategy against them is the only way to take them down.
I've got my wife happily using gnome 1.4 on RH7.3, and the differences in interface operation don't bother her.
I've thought about this some, and I actually think that as a more experienced computer user, I'm actually the one with a bigger problem switching from Windows to Linux. I think my mom would react pretty much the same way as your wife did when switching. You set her up with a few easy shortcuts, email, web browser, soitaire, and she just has 3 easy buttons to press, the same way she did before.
I, on the other hand, have to relearn just about everything I've ever known. What the hell are all these partitions for? How do I easily install and uninstall programs? Which one of these oddly named programs performs function X? I know that if I actually wanted to take the time to learn all this stuff, I could, and I'd probably be happy using Linux, but to be honest, I really don't want to spend the time. If I could, however transition over to a Linux-based system that looked and felt the same, I'd do it in a second. And by look-and-feel I don't just mean the start menu, I mean the locations of various settings, etc.
I know I can't be the only one who feels this way, and that's why I think projects like XPde are definitely worth pursuing. I looked at the screenshots and so far, I like what I see. I might even take a little time to try to get it setup and toy around with it.
Anyways, the whole point of my post was, it's alot easier for people who don't do many varied tasks on a computer to transition from clicking one of these three buttons in Windows to one of those three buttons in Linux...
As a longtime Mac enthusiast, I am not thrilled with anything that increases the use of the Windows platform.
I am, however, delighted that they're making an inroad into Microsoft's precious territory by simulating the MS interface. I'm particularly tickled to see that they're doing it by copying MS's OS and using it against them - the strategy that Microsoft has used with Mac from the very begining is coming back to bite it in the ass.
SERVES THEM RIGHT!!
If it's going to look and feel just like Windows, why would anyone bother to switch over?
The aim here should be to produce a superior interface over that which windows provides (like WindowMaker, which is superior to both MacOS UI and Windows UI).
However, there are many different WM and DE projects, and it doesn't hurt to try out several different concurrent strategies to try to convert Windows users. Some windows users will want something new, novel, and better, even if it means a little bit of a learning curve; others will want to jump right into doing things the way they normally do, and are probably the users switching over for the stability, security, good "price" provided by GNU/Linux.
So it's fine that we have all of these different options, and it's fine that many of them look like Windows. It's also fine that some of them can provide similarities to MacOS, BeOS, Amiga, and any other interface users may be attached to. However, a big problem is when people start developing apps to "only work" in one environment; e.g., apps which will only work with GNOME or KDE libraries installed. People should write apps to work in any X11 environment, and to fit in with whatever WM/DE they're placed into.
The same application which displays only windows-style horizontal menus in KDE should display only NeXT-style vertical menus in WindowMaker, and maybe only pie-style menus in SCWM. This implies some kind of universal interface for different tool-kits/WMs/DEs, where the programmer codes something equivalent to the following in pseudocode (where MI = menu item):
MI1. MI2. MI3. MI4. MI5. MI6.
MI1a MI2a MI3a MI4a MI5a MI6a
MI1b MI2b MI3b MI4b MI5b MI6b
MI1c MI2c MI3c MI4c MI5c MI6c
MI1d MI2d MI3d MI4d MI5d MI6d
MI1e MI2e MI3e MI4e MI5e MI6e
Where MI1. - MI6. are program menu's 1-6, and MIna - MInb are the submenu's of each main program menu. Now, what we need is something which will take that and automatically display it appropriately, depending on the environment. In KDE and GNOME and most other X11 environments, that would display as a windwos-style horizontal menu. In WindowMaker, it would display as a NeXT-style vertical menu, which is normally hidden but can be brought up by the user. In SCWM, it should display as a pie-menu, where selecting one item would open up a subsequent pie menu, etc. Such a meta-format would also be extended to other aspects of the program, such as toolbars, widgets, etc.
This way, the same program would look completely different, depending on what WM/DE it's run in. This way, the end-user has complete consistency in the look and feel of apps within his/her WM/DE.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
This story is featured on Google News. It will be interesting to see if Google slashdots Slashdot.
...I think I gotta throw up.
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
Why not copy Mac OS X's GUI? (and I don't mean simply changing the window decorations. Replicate the finder, dock, etc. also) But then again, they'll simply have Apple, (granted, a much smaller gorrilla) on their backs for copying their gui. Hmm... I suggest that linux just use the gui's they have now (gnome/kde) and make it more consistent and easier to use (like the basic things mentioned before... install progs w/o recompiling the kernel, etc.)
i agree wholehartedly. Having to relearn the filesystem and file/app naming conventions was/is the hardest thing about using Linux. I still don't know how to uninstall anything that i've compiled :(
i know this is trollish but i have to say
p g :) he he
wonder who's gonna hit
http://images.freshmeat.net/screenshots/31337.j
Dhruv
Your use of vertical market apps confuses me (I am not too bright)
By "vertical market apps" I refer to programs that are sold to very few buyers, such as apps designed for automating a particular aspect of a particular business. Because of lack of competition in such sectors, many of those programs are poorly written with absolute pixel placement of dialog elements, which does not scale to other font sizes.
but my point was people want to right click desktop, click on settings slide bar. That is how it is done in widows.
Assuming "widows" means "Microsoft Windows", that's still not how it was done on the last version of Mac OS that I used (Mac OS 8.1, four years ago, after having been away from Macs for four years at university).
The average person wants to change their wallpaper/resolution.
I figured out wallpaper very quickly even in the old-skool GNOME desktop included in Red Hat Linux 6.x. Under Mac OS 8, I could go to Control Panel and change the desktop picture. Under ancient GNOME, I could go to Control Center and change the desktop picture.
As for resolution, the "correct" way to make things readable is not to drop down from 1280x1024 to 800x600 but rather to tell the machine that your display has a high DPI and to display fonts accordingly.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Give me:
(a) redhat 8.1's fonts and install procedure and automagic install of oo.org etc.
(b) system compiled for 586/686
(c) file manager as fast as Win95 with right-click folder sharing
I keep trying Linux (slackware, caldera, mandrake, suse, redhat) over the years and keep coming back to a stripped down win9x box that is, in comparison, lightning fast.
Although after using redhat 8.1... win9x is starting to look pretty crappy in the fonts department on my 18" tft.
The problem with this sort of thing is that it is unlikly to ever exactly emulate Windows, and therefore could actully be more confusing and discouraging for someone just tring out Windows. If users see what looks like a familiar Windows desktop they may have very fixed expectations about how it will work as well, and minor changes from what they are used to will be jarring and probably make the system look broken and primitive to them. That may or may not turn out to be a major problem in this case, but I do wonder how much point there is bothering with this sort of thing.
That's EXACTLY why people should use xpde! Finally! a nice method for revenge at MS!
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
"Because that is what really gets me in the mood to work."
Does that mean you work for scale?
|joke|
it's just an operating system, not a way of life
I've seen this claim lots of times and I don't buy it. Free vs. proprietary is a way of life. Don't worry, you will discover that when you're 0wn3d by Palladium
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
I like the flexibility of repositioning toolbars on the MS file explorer and IE.
I like that I can put toolbars end to end, even end to end with the main menu bar.
Without this feature, a lot of screen space is wasted, esp, on high res screens.
I noticed that gnome, KDE, Mozilla all can't do it. Doesn't anyone else think this capability is useful?
Linux is ready right now.
The problem is in the apps, and the laziness of the app writers.
Installer? none exist for linux.. dont give me this rpm or apt-get crap. those are both worthless.
I want a fricking GUI installer that makes me all warm and fuzzy. and it installs the app's shortcut in the menu of KDE or GNOME correctly.
I want it to die and tell me what thousand obscure libraries I need..... Actually, no.. I want the developers to get off their lazy asses and supply STATICALLY compiled binaries that are READY TO GO until the cutting edge libs they use become standard.
I.E. you want to use latest and greatest? then statically compile or quit being a hinderance to linux.
Apps are the problem with linux.. Idiot programmers that are playing the LeeT game on the users. get off your fricking high horses, use a damned installer (www.loki.com is still up and is available there for anyone who has an IQ over 70 to find)
linux is not dominating because of gnucash, gimp, abiword, and the other thousands of apps that the programmers are too lazy to make installable for users.
yes,, the whole bunch of you are lazy and the fault why linux isnt big time in use right now.
Question: If the shoe fits, why not wear it?
After reading through all the comments attached to this windows-like GUI for linux, I'm wondering why so many people are opposed to it. After having used windows 3.1 for five years, followed by 9x and 2000/XP for the remaining 7 years, I've become quite used to every aspect of the user interface, and have found it to be incredibly efficient. Sure, the kernel is inefficient and unstable sometimes, but if I can do everything I need to do (edit a spreadsheet, print a textfile, compile some sourcecode) with a few familiar clicks and shortcut keys, that's just great.
The main question I have, though, is why exactly you want to have a different interface JUST because it *is* different. I'm not at all bashing those of you who are more used to the kde/gnome/whatever inteface...if you're more comfortable and fast with that sort of interface, all the power to you. The truth is, I find that the windows interface has everything where I expect it. I want to change something about my computer? Go to control panel. I want to change a setting related to my keyboard? It's in the keyboard section. In Mandrake 9.0 KDE, for example, there are three seperate locations in which I could change an option for my keyboard...all with different options and made by different people with different interfaces. I have to remember whether the option I saw was in menu A, B, or C, and then remember how to get to that menu...and where it is within that menu!
For power users, still not used to the wide world of linux, and not yet capable of reconfiguring and recreating their "perfect interface", this is in fact a good idea. Everything is where one would expect, but still runs under linux with its excellent efficiency and open sourced power. If the Microsoft interface is what it takes to make you feel comfortable, then so be it.
One of these days, I'm sure there'll be this "perfect interface" for linux...the windows one may not be it...but it certainly isn't the current spawn of KDE and GNOME that we see most popularly on terminals -- at least not how they exist now. Things need to be streamlined into an intrinsicly logical and efficient system.
The point of my rant: There is no need to make a different interface because it's "not MS". MS may be horrible at some things, but other things do in fact work, and don't need change. If the shoe fits, wear it.
-- Bandit450...If-Else-Do-*TWITCH*!
Slashdot must be a raising power since this article is listed right now on the front page of Google News, as well as 4 related. I've saved a screenshot for posterity. Kudos ;)
great. i'm really excited about this. really. it's going to be great to take a lousy, non-intuitive interface from ms and bring it to linux. and, it's even more amazing to be able to bring the same fisher-price look to the linux platform. will wonders never cease?
oh, and those big-honkin' title bars. i _love_ how those take up so much screen real-estate. i'll be really glad to have those on my linux box too.
seriously though, there are some real concerns here i'm afraid. one of the absolute worst things one can do in a user interface is create an expectation and then violate it. the windows interface itself does this often enough that it confuses people, thus causing support headaches. but, this i'm afraid will be worse. to copy it completely, they'll have to duplicate as much of that idiosyncratic behavior as possible. however, because the linux platform really is different, they'll have to make a few exceptions, thus creating even more opportunities to violate the users' expectations.
again, i'm left feeling that with the two general directions of innovate or duplicate, this accomplishes neither. if you're going to innovate, do so. if you're doing to duplicate, at least duplicate something work duplicating. the mac os x interface would be a good start. perfect? not hardly. preferable to windows? absolutely.
and, it seems honestly tragic to continue to reinforce the de-facto marketplace dominace of windows. like the start-button-menu system of windows? fine, copy it. kde and gnome have. but at least they _look_ different so users will expect it to operate at least a little differently. like taskbars? find, copy them. but make them work differently. take good (or at least tolerable) ideas and improve on them, don't just copy them blindly. only copy great ideas blindly. and honestly, there just aren't very many in windows.
geek friendly VPS's and free API enabled DNS : zerigo.com
Good answer, thank you. /tabula rasa/. Remember all those times you said "why does it X?", or "why doesn't it Y?", or "would't it be better if Z?", well now's the time to realise those ideas - find the one that does things the way you _want_ rather than merely what you're _used to_.
My perspective, which is of coursed biased by being a TOS/Mac/OS2/X/Win/X-user, in that order, over the last 15 years, is that now you've broken free from the single winterface start with
Maybe I'm just brave, your "user fear" is a superb answer, and I guess I can understand it, it's just not 'me'!
YAW.
Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
There is a reason for making a desktop look/function like Windows INITIALLY!
A example relates to spreadsheets. Many eons ago Apple decided to commit suicide by closing the box and many of us had to find an alternative to run spreadsheets. (I was one of the original spreadsheet users of Visicalc on a 16K Apple with floppies running $million projects). All new programs were running on IBM PC. After looking at Supercalc, etc, etc, I was able to convince our company to switch to Lotus123. Why? Because it functioned very much like Visicalc and it copied one crucial feature. It allowed formulas to be dynamically built by moving the cursor (later the mouse was used) but all its competitors required typing in the cell references! Apparently, our company wasn't the only one that made the same decision because Lotus prospered until Excel arrived. This problem exists today; I looked at openoffice spreadsheet and I will not use it because it makes all the same mistakes of 20 years ago regarding the dynamic building of formulas. It takes many more key strokes to build a formula than Excel (hit +/- go to cell you want, perform other operations as desired, etc). I will not switch to Openoffice until they make this (and other things) function just the same as they do in Excel.
My operating system is being frozen at Windows 2000 because I won't give permission to screw with my machine or have to beg to install or change my hardware. Currently, I have looked at SUSE (7.1 didn't install properly), Lindows 3.0 (the click and run works well), Mandrake 9.0 (a clutsy install but it works).
The problem with all these is I have to relearn how everything works and I DON'T READ MANUALS! If someone makes a Lindows that functions just like Windows then I am probably likely to switch AND then customize and change things to my liking. If I am required to learn everything (and I am not a novice because I had a Sun server at another job), my choice might be the BEOS operating system or something totally new (Apple fanatics can avoid writing because I find the Mac totally unfathomable).
A Linux desktop should have these features as a minimum:
1. Look exactly like Windows 2000 (or XP),
2. Hide the hideous file structure of Linux from the user (it is a remnant of its time slice past),
3. Have an on line repository of free and commercial software available a la Lindows,
4. Installation of programs needs to be standardized with a Setup.exe equivalent and none of this rpm crap (I'm still trying to figure out how to install Opera under Linux; Windows was a snap),
5. An audio standard for streaming audio and playback is necessary so the BBC and others can adopt it (even KALX at Berkeley, the home of a Unix variant, requires Real player),
6. Hardware drivers for modern audio and video equipment,
7. An office suite that includes a database that can substitute for MSOffice (this is probably the hardest task).
There are probably other items but this is all I can think of at this time.
Finally, every post that I have read ignores the billions of dollars and millions of hours of training that have gone into Windows over the last 8 years. Companies and individuals are not willing to spend the time or money to learn something new IF Windows still works. Start at the Windows base and build up open source software from there. Grade schools, high schools, and colleges can make the switch easily because there is a minimal training base to overcome, but businesses have SIGNIFICANT investment in Windows. Businesses will not switch to a new desktop/applications if lots of money must be spent for training until Windows creates a tower of babel with their DCMA implementations.
I still don't know how to uninstall anything that i've compiled...
/opt/app-name and create soft links in /usr/local/bin if you really wanted to be neat about it. This also makes it easy to install multiple versions of software in parallel. Wheee
If you still have the source code, (preferably the build tree), use "make uninstall" as opposed to "make install"
If you deleted the build tree after you installed the app, untar it again, then re-run the configure script from last time (use your command history!). Then do the make uninstall.
And if that fails, just use find / -ctime (flags, date range, read the manpage) to find the files that were installed or moved aside on a certain day, and do it manually. There is no registry to mess up in linux, so this is perfectly acceptable.
It would have been smart to install the app in
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
XFree86 built under Cygwin is *horrible*; get a real X server (for Windows).
or tries as best as they can
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/default.asp
Just because Unix is the way of my computer, that doesn't make it the way of my life.
You sir, are an ass. Get outside you dirty fucken wanking git! Clottish bork-ass basecourt john-apple. You clouted lout pudding-for-brains fucktard! Evil ass master!!! BEGONE WITH THEE!!!
... better yet, I'll get some better stuff, that doesnt give a bad high.
Lets se for starters, I just bought a super cheap bottom of the line Lexmark. And Low and Behold, in their documentation was the URL to the Linux driver install program. It would have been nice if it came on the included CD, but Microsoft will not allow them to do that. It realy does not matter. Lexmark provides a driver package for Linux that is 100% as functional as the Microshaft equivilent. Its a small download. Once downloaded, it runs disgustingly like any Windows Install Wizard. Printer set up is via a cute little tabbed GUI thingy, just like on Windows.
Whats this shit about compiling Kernel modules? I've never "had too" compile a Kerlel Module, except to get my HP5300C scanner working. And that was definitlt a special case, involving patching of drivers as changes came along, and doing some of my own tweeking. All of this would not have been except for MS bullying via liscencing agreements.
Last time I bought an NIC, it came with a floppy containing the Linux Driver, wich BTW is a kernel module that I did not have to compile, just install because THATS WHAT A MODULAR KERNEL IS FOR!!!
That is the only way in fact, that linux will ever overtake the MS Windows desktop. Most non techies cannot easily make the (massive in their eyes) switch to a new desktop and OS. Embrace & extend works, is proven, and is a good strategy, and we should back it up in order to get people off the Monopoly when we can..
Wrong, the only way it will ever overtake MS Windows is by not trying to play catchup with it, but instead making something completely new and innovative that is BETTER. But instead, this is yet another Windows-transition-project with the excuse that it's easier for the users.
I think you mean GEM not TOS. GEM was the GUI running on TOS I think???
-- RTFM:Slackware::Beer:Saturday
the wallpaper is similar but not identical.
Yes, but where are the Teletubbies?
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
The whole point of your post was to say how downhill XP went after 2k? What does that have to do with this article?
There's this neat feature in XP. You go to Display Properties and switch the Visual Style to classic mode.
Wow, looks like your dillemna was solved.
Holy cow, they fixed the horrid fonts, which was the only complaint I had last time... (I still hope they double-buffer everything so it doesn't flicker like most Linux GUIs though)... Wow - finally a Linux desktop that looks slick and professional... (no offense to GNOME and KDE - but I always found them somewhat sub-par compared to good old explorer.exe).
Bash on Microsoft and then try to copy them.
Brilliant and hilarious. Thanks for the morning smile!
Yeah. Thanks! I really should have known. I once used a PC with Digital-Research's original GEM, it had a 1600x1200 resolution monochrome screen, nothing amazing for the late 90s, but this was the 80s! The video-card was full-length, full-height, and double-width (i.e.it took up 2 ISA slots) and was covered in about 120 chips, mostly RAM. So I /should/ have remembered GEM.
I stuck that 'TOS' one on at the beginning of the list as an afterthought. Not enough afterthought, it appears!
YAW.
Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
I looked at the screenshots and so far, I like what I see. I might even take a little time to try to get it setup and toy around with it.
I think you'll be disappointed. The UI will look very similar but it won't feel the same, and you'll notice the little differences immediately. You'll then want to configure the system, change hardware later etc. and it won't be anywhere near as easy and nothing at all like Windows. You'll start having to mess with all kinds of configuration that the XPDE interface doesn't cover, eg. setting up CUPS, setting up SAMBA, whatever.
I think you would move beyond the whole I-like-this-because-it's-similar thing very, very quickly. And the you would be like "ohhhh" and like "errrrr" and like "ahhhh" and like "shit".
Q:I'm a avid reader of Slashdot, I'm a Linux guru, I'm a BOFH, I'm a geek, Why the hell would I want this f#@#ng software?
;-)
A:Sorry, but I think this is not the project for you. (well, at least geeks like any kind of tech, so if you want to look at the source code..
It's here
Feed me a stray cat.
For (3) use nautilus it is a great file browser and if you install gnome-vfs-extras2 it will gain the ability to browse your smb neighborhood. It Looks ALOT better than everything else, is alot more customizable and since this is a GUI after all, did I mention that it looks better.
Also install gnome-vfs-extras, then you can do things like bowse your rio device, and there is also fontilus whihc gives you a uniform way of viewing your installed fonts. Did I mention that this all looks good?
gerr...shivers...That looks exactly like Windows. If I hadn't been told it was GNU/Linux, I would think it was windows (aside from the terminal, which gave it away).
This is definately not for traditional GNU/Linux users who realize that many WM/DE combinations provide a superior UI to windows, but it is a nice hook for newbies entering GNU/Linux who want familiarity. Group it in with Lindows in that regard.
Hopefully, eventually these newbies will experiment alittle and go beyond their windows huts. But, if not, what's the difference? It is, after all, just a UI. The real good thing about GNU/Linux is it's security, stability, free (as in freedom) nature, and powerful commands, utils, and apps.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
After reading the FAQS page it states over and over that its not for the Linux Guru to use on as their desktop environment. Its meant as a tool for those guys to setup for the "Windows Simpleton". So if you are a "Windows Guru" your not who its aimed at. It will be used as a tool for an orginization too switch over to linux desktops, most likely the orginzation who are using locked down desktops or considering it.
"Linux is better... Windows sucks... I hate windows... Linux Rules..." I know! Let's make Linux look like windows! Now Linux sucks. HAHAHA we showed them didn't we! Open Source Forever!
you insensitive clod!
- Cut, copy and paste that works between ALL applications
- One standard, common file-association / MIME-type setup
- One standard, common menu system set-up
- Fast, comprehensive file manager - I should be able to do whatever I want without having to resort to an xterm shell
- Common add-in architecture, so installed software can interface with context menus, task-bar etc. in a standard way
THESE are the aspects of Windows that Linux needs to replicate, not just the pretty icons. These are all features that Windows got right years ago, but Linux is still struggling with to this day.-"I still believe in revolution; I just don't capitalize it anymore." - srini!
Lets face it, windows is yesterdays GUI technology. If you want to have a look at a great GUI that has all the underpinnings of a solid unix system. Look no further than Apple's OSX 10.2.4
The KDE and GNOME people should start getting their ideas from Apple, not Microsoft. Better still how about something original?
Its taken the best part of a year to move my entire family and I off windows, why would I want to go back?
Yeah, I mean, it's so intuitive.
>> Microsoft (and Apple) make operating systems for people like you who don't understand computers, aren't interested in them and don't want to be.
/. editors are all using Apple laptops as their main production tools!
You better shut your filthy mouth and should be shamed of yourself for making a sweeping statement like that. I don't who the hell you are, but many of the alpha geeks like Jordan Hubbard (FreeBSD lead programmer), James Duncan Davidson (the original author of Apache Tomcat and Ant), James Gosling (Inventor of Java) and the core Perl 6 team have all switched to Mac OS X. Even CmdrTaco himself and at least 4 other
It's really a rather sad fact of life that the Linux community is full of hot heads like you. Just because you prefer CLI doesn't automatically make you a superior computer user in any sense. I have been a Unix / C++ / Jave programmer for over a decade, and I am proud that I enjoy both good GUI and Unix terminal for different tasks. In my view, OS X has vastly more elegant GUI, better programming environment and more stability than Linux and Windows put together, and simply is the best there is for both geeks and novices alike.
I agree that OSX looks cool, but this story is about XPde NOT KDE or Gnome. The Three are different.
"The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS
She doesn't need to install applications contantly.( Hopefully that'll be 1 more reason to keep me around)
You need some marriage counseling? Judging by your low UID, you've probably been reading slashdot so long that your addiction to it is pulling you away from your wife. And you probably don't like it when she nags you to install her applications either.
(Giant crushing foot!)
Ron Paul 2012
This is yet another example that the Linux community is totoally incapable of true GUI innovation, and the name alone gives it away. Why the hell is it called XPde if it looks and feels like Win 2000?
The Win XP GUI is really just a amateurish copy of Mac OS X, and even the name smells a rip off - XP vs X and Luna vs Aqua. Why don't they copy the real thing instead of a cheap imitation?
Forget copying the Windows UI, that's absurd.
.RPM or .DEB, in which case it is already figured out for you (Mandrake-branded site will default to .RPM, etc).
Someone is going to get on that machine, go to Start -> Programs looking for "Microsoft Excel" and feel like an idiot or be completely frustrated because they couldn't find it.
NO ONE has complained that people stay away from OS X "because it doesn't look like Windows." WHY are we trying to pretend that's the reason people don't try Linux?
If you want Windows people to use Linux, we need distributions to do a few things:
Ditch 3 of the 4 programs that do the same thing. Seriously. Why do I need 4 CD-R burning programs? Just give me the one that works the best, that's *all I care about* - and make sure it's labeled "CD Burner" so I don't have to decipher "gkdesbUISO." Contrary to what people here may think, we do NOT need to include every single Web Browser available. Don't put every alternative in the "Programs" menu - you hide the extra versions, and it only comes out when someone says they are an "advanced" user. Or perhaps a help option that says, "Software Doesn't Do What You Want? Try These:"
Distro installers should have a "I have never used Linux before, but I have been using Windows for 5 years" option. This will offer extra help in the form of, "If you are looking for this, you will now use this instead."
Make sure "regular" users *only* need the first CD. In the case of a 3 CD distro like Mandrake, make the additional CDs required only for developers and/or international users.
When you setup the desktop, be it either Gnome or KDE, you need to include a few "What do I do now?" icons on the desktop. I'm not talking about your "Welcome," because most of these people are illiterate or too lazy to read them, I'm talking about a few icons such as "Games," "Mozilla Web Browser," and "OpenOffice Applications." Do NOT just call the web icon "Mozilla," because these people have no idea what Mozilla even is.
I don't know if one exists yet, but we need yet-another new standard Linux portal. One that can be branded with Mandrake, RedHat, etc, but has software reviews, HOWTOs, special tips, best applications in each category, downloads, news, a forum, etc. And when you click to download a file, it is either a
Apple has the portal down to an art--take heed as it will go a long way to making them feel like they are both a part of something, and that they've just entered a Brave New World as opposed to being made to feel like an idiot because they can't find anything or get anything done.
The thing that most mainstream distros seem to be doing well, is that as soon as they are installed, 99% of the applications you will ever need are already installed and setup. With Windows, you're stuck with installing all of your software off of CD again, downloading everything again, etc, etc.
Prove me wrong now.
Jason Fisher
why not just run windows if this is what people want? it'll work much better.
or.....
why not do something fucking original? sheesh, gnu programmers seem to have no hci/gui creativity.
WTF is OS-X?
The screenshots on the site have seemed to have changed differently from what they were earlier today, strange.
Judging by your low UID, you've probably been reading slashdot so long that your addiction to it is pulling you away from your wife.
Uh-oh.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
But flexible! No wonder Linux does so much better than Windows. Its flexible, dammit!
My perspective, which is of coursed biased by being a TOS/Mac/OS2/X/Win/X-user, in that order, over the last 15 years,
Exactly. You've used many different setups over a 15 year period. In the 10+ years I've been working with computers, it's been Windows only. There are millions of people in a similar situation. But they're scared to death of losing productivity when switching to a new OS, and I can't blame them. If we can have a GUI that helps ease the transition, then it's a good idea to make one.
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
Make OpenOffice look exactly the same as MS Office, down to the applications and installer interface, burn it to a CD and print a fake label that looks like Microsoft's, problem solved.
Except maybe the hordes of rabid Microsoft lawyers, you have to solve that one on your own.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Why do I need 4 CD-R burning programs? Just give me the one that works the best, that's *all I care about*
What's best for you may not be best for someone else. For example, the general masses would probably vote open office as the best. But I prefer gnumeric over Open Office's spreadsheet. I think RedHat does a pretty good job at picking out which apps are truely the best, and which have competitors and let you decide. So which is best for you? KDE? GNOME? XPDE? Who's to say? There are 100s of distros to choose from at DistroWatch, im sure there is one there that will fit your needs.
Exactly what is so horrible about the Windows GUI? The title bars don't take up any more space than they do in Gnome, KDE, Window Maker, or ANYTHING ELSE for that matter. The interface is one of the few things about Windows you can't complain about. I have never been confused about anything in Windows pertaining to the UI. It might not be what you are used to, but that's entirely the point. There are a lot of people out there that HAVE NOT USED LINUX BEFORE AND MIGHT DO SO IF IT LOOKED AND FELT MORE FAMILIAR. This project is not aimed at the people that already use Linux. It is not aimed at you, me, or for that matter, ANYONE that regularly reads and posts on Slashdot. It is a stepping stone. It is to be treated as such.
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
the XP titlebars do take more space than their predecessors. as for inconsistancies, real or perceived, howabout these:
when dragging a file somewhere, is it copied, moved, or is a shortcut created? it depends on a semi-complex set of rules that ordinary joes are not going to understand. is there visual indication of what it's going to do? no.
when you pull up your start menu, are things going to be in the same place as the last time you used it? if you have the default personalized menus, no. not efficient.
need to go to your device manager? where exactly you find it will vary depending on your version of windows. again, inconsistant. the same is true in numerous places throughout the system. again, inconsistancy for the user and absolute hell for anyone trying to help the average user with their machine, eg: tech support.
the windows interface is complex and confusing. there are way too many options and way too many ways to accomplish the same thing. numerous options and numerous paths to a given option are complex. this is _not_ what the average user needs. they need a simple and consistant interface. furthermore, the file system on a computer is _not_ the web. it doesn't work like the web. therefore, it should not have the same interface.
i am _not_ strictly opposed to familiarity for the end user. what i am opposed to is sacrificing other things in order to accomplish it. especially when it's visual duplication, but isn't functionally identical. again, it has to deal with expectations. users get _very_ used to things working an exact way. _any_ variation confuses them. some of this variation is considered a 'feature' in recent windows os's. this is bad. the linux community should not duplicate these features, and in fact should make things _look_ a little different so it is obvious to the user that things will work a little differently. this does not mean a radical depature, but some visual cue. additionally, because some fundamentals to linux systems are different than windows systems due to underlying architecture, we should be careful to deliberately make things look a little different there too. again, to _help_ the user see that it _is_ different.
geek friendly VPS's and free API enabled DNS : zerigo.com
I mean really, this is getting out of hand.
We Linux folks take pride in distancing ourselves from M$, winbloz and Gate$..
Why are a tiny few hell bent on dragging us back into the seventh circle of hell?
If I NEVER see another M$ product ever again my life will be complete....
If you people like M$ so F'ing much, USE IT and LEAVE LINUX ALONE DAMN IT !!!
bye bye mootif
*cough* Lindows *cough*
While i`m all for choice with regards "desktop" environments and window managers, is interoperability... For instance, an app installer should be able to add itself to a central standard location and it then appears in the menu of all window managers, it should NOT need to add itself to multiple places, nor should individual window managers need to support the menu format of multiple others.
I also dont like the "desktop" analogy, my desktop is what the monitor stands on. A computer is a unique tool in it`s own right, it shouldnt be an emulation of something we have already... that`s why you dont call a television a window.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
I thought the whole point of having Linux is that it's not the same as Windows? Sure, it's "cute" to have Linux look like Windows, but I'd prefer to have my Linux look like Linux, and not like Windows XP. That being said , I do see the interest in a Windows-like environment (something like Lindows) for people who are starting out with Linux, after switching from Windows to Linux. Perhaps it would give them more of a sense of familiarity, though I don't know how valid that is.
"Alle reden vom wetter. Wir nicht." - SDS Sozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund.
j00 4r3 3n73r1ng l337 w0r1d.
ug... why copy windows?!?! garg.
to think i put so much effort into replaceing explorer with litestep to make win2k not look and act like win2k, and here are a bunch of guys making linux act and feel like regular win2k! CRAZY!
Remember qvwm
My point is that the mainstream populace that uses a computer ultimately does NOT care what OS they use. However, they are used to being told which is the best, what they need to use, and what they have to use.
You have to decide which packages are best for the mainstream, then you teach them how to research alternatives in the case that what you gave them does not meet their needs.
We're talking about people that don't even know what KDE, GNOME, XPDE, OpenOffice, gnumeric, etc, even ARE. They have NO clue and *want* to be guided.
They don't even know what "distro" means without it being explained to them.
Myself, I would love it if I could walk into school and they told me, "Here is every piece of material you will ever need to learn to be considered a graduate of this school. Enjoy." On the other hand, most people need to actually be taught and told.
Welcome to the real world.
Jason Fisher
Just another thing to add here... I use Mac OS X, Windows 2000 Pro and GNU/Linux daily at work, but Mac OS X is my preferred system at home. Why can't Linux or Windows offer the same flexible drag and drop as the Mac does?
For example, in Windows,
Select some text in IE.
Open Notepad.
Try dragging the selected text from the IE window to the Notepad window.
YOU CAN'T....
Why? This works perfectly well on the Mac.
In terms of ease of use on the desktop I reckon from good to bad it goes Mac -> Windows -> Linux. Linux has a lot to learn and Windows does too. Once you've seen the flexibility of the Mac's desktop environment (it does work the way your brain works) you'll want to hunt down both the M$ Windows and GNOME/KDE desktop developers and give them a good kicking. That'll learn them.
Ditch 3 of the 4 programs that do the same thing. Seriously. Why do I need 4 CD-R burning programs?
That's part of the eternal conflict between usability and power. I for one think the distro makers should NOT choose one for you and just omit the others, but maybe they could sort of highlight one in their menus?
As for the other points, I would have thought they were already there, in newbie distros like SuSE. If they're not, they'd make a good addition indeed.
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
ROX was the first thing I installed on my fresh Linux installation. Best file manager out there and quick (opening /usr/bin on a system with 4GB of stuff installed took fraction of a second).
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
This is great, Im a windows guy, but this will definately help me take a closer look, and possibly switch to NIX. -peedy
Naaah. Check my posts - I'm not on here constantly.
Moderation is key.
Actually, I'm usually the ones that's showing / installing new applications for her ( I like her I-Book - I want one. Must remember it's hers. It's hers.. not mine... ).
I install new apps; she usually finds strange web pages that we both enjoy. It's an even trade.
There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
Are they allowed to do that? Doesn't Microsoft own some sort of copyright (or something) on thier graphics?
Aw crap, ninjas!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
turdburglars slashdottin' hordes of slashdot readers
!!
when dragging a file somewhere, is it copied, moved, or is a shortcut created?
/dev. You're trying to AVOID confusion, and nothing is more confusing to an average user than the Linux device setup. Hell, it confuses me half the time.
;)
AFAICT, dragging an EXE makes a shortcut. Dragging a regular file moves it. Dragging something from a CD copies it.
need to go to your device manager? where exactly you find it will vary depending on your version of windows. again, inconsistant.
How do you get to the device manager in Linux? I'm not talkine about
the windows interface is complex and confusing. there are way too many options and way too many ways to accomplish the same thing.
Linux has the same problem, only worse. I can set up my system from the KDE panel, the Mandrake panel, or the Gnome panel. I could also use linuxconf if I was a masochist. There SHOULD BE many different ways of doing things, and I haven't ever found myself thinking "WHICH ONE of the setup utilities do I use?" in Windows.
furthermore, the file system on a computer is _not_ the web. it doesn't work like the web. therefore, it should not have the same interface.
Agreed, for the most part. I hate the way that MS is trying to integrate web crap into the desktop. Every time I see Active Desktops enabled on someone's computer I kick their ass about it.
we should be careful to deliberately make things look a little different there too. again, to _help_ the user see that it _is_ different.
If you put someone behind a keyboard with a computer running XP and a computer running a look-alike, they'll tell the difference immediately. But they have a good idea of where to look when they need something. Then sit them down behind Gnome and watch them squirm.
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
Unix is the way of my computer, that doesn't make it the way of my life.
When computers control your life, it does
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
About as intuitive as installing under
\Program Files\app-name
and making "shortcuts" under
\Documents and Settings\username\Start Menu\Programs
Apples with Apples...
"Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco
So in the 10+ years that you've been working with computers, you've used: (just a sample of what you've been exposed to)
DOS+Win3/3.1/3.11
* Filenames were Filename.ext 8.3 limited, all uppercase.
* Every program installed in its own DIRECTORY, and you had a Program Manager, into which you had to put the icons for the programs which you used.
* You either had a profusion of GROUPS in your Program Manager, or you knew how to rearrange all your icons and create/delete groups through an arcane menu structure.
* Turning your computer off involved clicking a switch or pressing a button on the case.
Win95
* Most programs install in the Program Files FOLDER, and you started programs by clicking on items in a Menu accessed by clicking a button in a corner of the screen. Some programs still seem to install in other random places on the drive.
* Editing the contents of the menu involved creating and deleting files in certain special direc^H^H^H^H^H FOLDERS in the system.
* Turning your computer off involved running the Shutdown command on the Start menu, then pressing a button on the case.
* Switching applications is done by clicking the taskbar item.
* Ctrl-Alt-Delete no longer reboots the machine, but brings up the Close Programs dialog.
* My Documents was a folder under C:\
* Long filenames were supported. You could use any case except all uppercase. Filenames which differed only by case were, however, considered identical.
Win98
* Most programs install in the Program Files FOLDER, and you started programs by clicking on items in a Menu accessed by clicking a button in a corner of the screen.
* You edit the menu by right-clicking on the menu items to access another menu.
* Turning your computer off involved running the Shutdown command on the Start menu.
* Logout and Suspend switched places.
* Clicking a program's taskbar entry can minimize it.
* My Documents appeared on your Desktop
Win2000
* You probably can't install programs, unless you are the administrator.
* Turning off the computer involves a dropdown menu instead of a set of radio buttons.
* Ctrl-Alt-Delete no longer brings up the Close Programs Dialog, but a Login Information dialog.
* Windows pops up "speech bubbles" telling you to install security upgrades.
WinME - I haven't used this enough to comment on it's differences.
WinXP
* You log in by clicking on your name.
* Your Start menu now is two-columns wide, with the stuff you used previously relegated to the end, unbolded.
* Turning off the computer involves the Turn Off Computer command, which gives you buttons for Turn Off, Reboot, and Log Off (or suspend, or somesuch).
And you're telling me you can't use a system where the start menu says "K" and the Filesystem is case sensitive, and your My Documents folder is called Home.
"Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco
with the same post... that's amazing
We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
But if I couldn't use my present pair of legs with your new underwear, how likely would I be to purchase them? Too much legacy stuff. "How the heck can I play my favorite game?" or "I have to learn a new spreadsheet program?"
The answer is quite simple. Pirated software. If a whole bunch of new programs which work wonderfully with your Squiggleslash O/S were to appear on Kazaa, the masses would flock to it.
You'd might as well ask why lemmings leap to their deaths. Because everyone else is doing it!
Face it, people are sheep. Like Tommy Lee Jones said in MIB, "A person is smart, people are stupid."
I know this comment is a bit late (about 8 days late)... but I just got around to installing XPde, and was highly unimpressed. the screenshots make it look very useable, which it isn't.
lots of the buttons are dead, as in don't do anything.
I guess maybe someday it will be usable if they keep at it, but by then it will be pointless.
no comment
look at how you got schooled bitch. you stupid fucking bitch. you are a know nothing fucktart gamer asshole and no matter how long i wait between visiting your comments, be it a week or months, you are a fucking know nothing drone asshole.
your posts here serve as a testament to your fucking stupidity. keep it up fuckhead. keep it up.
slashbotting mediocritomaton puke loser. get some sex from someone othe rthan your parents for once, greaseball.
THE STORY OF CREATION
...
or
THE MYTH OF URK
In the beginning there was data. The data was without form and null, and
darkness was upon the face of the console; and the Spirit of IBM was moving
over the face of the market. And DEC said, "Let there be registers;" and
there were registers. And DEC saw that they carried; and DEC separated the
data from the instructions. DEC called the data Stack, and the instructions
they called Code. And there was evening and there was morning, one interrupt
-- Rico Tudor
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...