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 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 |
http://images.freshmeat.net/screenshots/32217.jpg
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*
(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.
http://www.steelblue.com/WinEyes/
desktop proeprties
explorer
notepad
start menu
My server
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.
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
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.
"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?
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.
X has supported this for longer than Windows existed BUT (and this is the huge BUT) no-one is demanding support for this stuff from the apps. No amount of architectural support and documentation makes one single X application actually paste images.
In X11 (and presumably Windows) there is a negotiation step during the Paste phase of the Cut/Copy/Paste clipboard system, where the conversation goes like this:
App1: Hi App2, I hear you have the clipboard contents. What's in there?
App2: Hi App1, I have ASCII, UTF8, HTML, SLASHDOT-RANT or INSANE-NONSENSE
App1: Gee, most of that went straight over my head, I'll take some UTF8 please.
App2: Here you go: UTF8 text follows
All you need to do is convince X app authors who might have some use for it to add XPIXMAP or whatever to their send/receive acceptable types list and then write the appropriate encoding and decoding stuff for their app.
Once one or two popular apps do this AT ALL, it would be worth going to FreeDesktop and getting a simple standard written which says e.g. what format the clipboard image should be, and how to encode/decode it.
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...
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.
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 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.