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.

7 of 438 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Embrace and extend... it works by takochan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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..

  2. Re:But wait... by Planesdragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I thought people used Linux so they would not have to deal with the Windows horrid GUI?

    Nope. People use Linux because they like the CLI, they like Free Software, they like Open Source, they Hate Microsoft, or they're just Cheap Ethical Bastards.

    Very, very few people use Linux becaues they think that it's got a better GUI than Windows.

  3. Mimic the right things... by skurken · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

  4. Re:This helps a lot of scared older folks by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What people want is to install drivers the same ad download crap little cheesey programs and install them.

    People want their brand new POS Lexmark to work by plugging it in and dropping the CD in. These are the same people that like the fact that their printer blurts "Printing Started" whenever they print something. The fact that Linux software installs usually only involve double clicking a file and entering a password will be a disadvantage, people want to click on a wizard over and overr again. The fact that most driver installs in Linux involve compiling a kernel module will be even worse. The fact that most inexpensive hardware is unsupported at all on Linux (by the manufaturer) is the serious problem though. Nobody wants to search forums for their NIC driver, and nobady wants to pick which printing system to use for their brand new $49 printer. Look and feel aside the personal desktop market for Linux is a long way off. This Win2k look alike has huge potential in the business office though. Where you don't want people to install their random crap hard/software. 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).

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  5. Windows look-a-likes are bogus - but good too by anagama · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  6. Well that's cool I guess by garett_spencley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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>

  7. CUT-AND-PASTE IS NOT ONLY FOR TEXT by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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