Slashdot Mirror
Everaldo and Jimmac On Linux Art and Usability
Eugenia writes "Metin Amiroff of OSNews interviewed the well known artists of KDE and GNOME, Everaldo and Jimmac. They discuss their first steps into Linux, the applicationss they use and why Linux still doesn't have all the professional applications and support they need for their day to day work, their inspiration, the state of the Linux desktop visually and usability-wise, the SVG factor and their future plans for KDE and GNOME."
Even though the art in an OS is far from vital, it makes the experience easier. Un like some OS's with bad graphics, its like watching surgery.
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
Cue replies from Gimp-bashers in 3, 2, 1....
If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
In Windows, the different icons and color schemes don't vary too much. Some programs have stupid icons - but most have fairly neat icons and artwork.
However, in Linux IMO, it's not the case. Some icons and artwork looks amazing while others look absolutely horrible. After dabbling with linux a few times, I really can't stand how the different schemes of different programs don't seem to fit together too well. In Mandrake 10 (last Linux I've used), there were whole different styles of icons.. like, Open Office had it's own set that were X pixels by Y colors in Z-bit color.. while Random Mandrake Prog had icons A pixels by B colors in C-bit color.
I am starting to think that I would rather just have an entire OS that didn't use Icons. Instead, it would be only labeled buttons.
--- We need more Ron Paul!
http://www.everaldo.com/
http://jimmac.musichall.cz/index.php3
Desktop Linux for the common user is an eventuality, not merely a possibility.
:)
There is way too much interest displayed by business both large and small to see Linux displace MS Windows for the cost savings alone. So far, it's primarily server-side stuff but moving from server to desktop is also an eventuality.
So any time I see some article stating "Linux doesn't have this or that" or "...isn't ready..." I start to yawn a bit. I think it's nice that they're honest enough not to say that it will never happen.
An interview about art and usability of free software and not a single word about dyne:bolic? I am very disappointed.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
There are many, many talented graphics artists in the world, but almost no one is asking for their help on these projects. Nor does the average programmer know where to go to find artists who are willing to help out.
We need an Open Graphics Art Project to connect together open source programmers with open art artists.
Same thing to a lesser extent with other professions like information architects (often found in the same person as a graphic artists, but not identical), usability/ergonomics, writing, game playability tuning, etc.
Perhaps all it would take is the right web site to help these people find each other.
Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary
...and here I thought that (too much) of the visual inspiration for both was Windows XP (and Windows 98 before that), hence the garish colors and the unnecessary complexity and eye-candy.
If you want to use the KDE icons in gtk+ applications, you should check out this page which builds upon the GTK-QT theme engine. It works well, I'm using it right now to chat on Gaim.
While in terms of absolute best visual quality, I have to say that OS X beats any linux theme i've seen (although a number of the aqua themes are really nice), I think linux wins for customizability. ,Gnome2 is also looking really nice, though in a different way.
While others may disagree, I think that Windows XP has perhaps the absolute worst graphical style of any modern OS.
Aqua is really slick, but eventually it gets old, wheras there are dozens of really nice looking themes for KDE.
Even though I have a personal preference for KDE,
I think the biggest advantage Linux has over other OS's is that, while there may not be as many artist using Linux, any artist who wishes has the option of adding artwork or making any other changes to any given program, and the best of those can be incorperated into the program.
Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
Just in case there are still some Slashdotters who do not yet know dyne:bolic, please let me quote dyne:bolic website:
Therefore, as you can clearly see, asking about dyne:bolic should be the very first question a self-respecting journalist would ask in any interview "on Linux art and usability." Otherwise such an interview is not even worth the screen it is printed on. For more interesting informations please visit dyne:bolic and media activists websites. There are many artists already using dyne:bolic. More informations about "GNU GPL free and opensource software by a rastafari programmer lost in babylon pioneering multimedia on GNU/Linux since 2000" can be found on the Rastasoft website. I believe Metin Amiroff should include the above informations in the next interview. I might add that simply googling for Linux art and following some links before making the interview might have found dyne:bolic in the first place. We certainly need more articles and interviews on the subject.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
You don't need a full-fledged OS in order to compile one. Any half-baked operating system which is functional enough and has a compiler worth its salt can compile Linux for example. All you're doing is taking source code and outputting machine code. That's not hard to do. [Not to say it's trivial, only that it's a well-understood and thoroughly solved problem.]
This isn't really about self-sufficiency, I don't think. You can have a G5 running OS X and have a really awesome user interface but lack the software needed to recreate the interface. For example, if Photoshop or other graphics editing programs weren't available for the Mac, that doesn't detract in any way from the usability of the Mac interface. Yes, it's *better* if your operating system had the tools needed to recreate it... but usability isn't a function of self-sufficiency.
Plus, this article is only one perspective on the matter. For people who live and breathe Photoshop, they're going to be disappointed with the native Linux experience as it won't meet their needs. Who cares about an operating system that can achieve an infinite uptime and has efficient multiprocessor thread pooling when they can't do their work? On the other hand, I've seen some truly amazing work done in GIMP, so it's a personal thing.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
Second: Dell currently does not even ship computers with AMD processors yet, and you expect them to ship preinstalled Linux machines? I don't think so.
Laws are horrible moral guides, moral guides make even worse laws.
What are you on about? Select an object, click it again, and rotate. Sodi Podi is fanstastic at rotation.
Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?
From the Sodipodi tips and tricks page:
Object rotation
When in Select mode, click on an object to see the scaling arrows, then click again on the object to see the rotation and shift arrows. If the arrows at the corners are clicked and dragged, the object will rotate about the opposite corner. If you hold down the shift key while doing this, the rotation will occur about the Rotation Point (nominally the center of the object).
The Rotation Point can be moved by clicking on the very center of the object and dragging the center point to where you want to pivot around. Then if you shift-drag on a corner point, it will rotate about that point.
My other first post is car post.
OSX does it in a couple ways:
Most apps can be installed simply by decompressing them and moving the application icon wherever you want. To uninstall you just delete the one Icon, all the associated files are packaged together inside it.
Some apps use a very simple wizard. You open it, click yes on the EULA, select the partition you want to install to, and click next.
Let's make a difference
I'd just like to remind you all (I do this periodically) to take a look at www.kde-look.org and check it regularly! For whatever reason this is the *one* Linux based site (well, kde anyway) that has managed to form a healthy alliance between the graphics world and the Linux community.
This is the kind of cross pollination we *really* need. And before anyone starts to say anything about other attempts, review the format they are using. Look at the little things like the clean organization and the *feedback* options. This site sets a standard I have yet to see anyone live up to and it does it while encouraging the artists! My hats off. Lets encourage more positive interaction with our users and those of us with an artistic bend!
Quack, quack.
Like hell it is an improved interface of NeXTStep. It's a bastardization of NeXTStep without the Power of NeXTStep--no WindowServer.app--not to mention NeXTStep is a UI Design Paradigm still unequaled today in its consistency, productivity and ease-of-use. And MECCA (Openstep 4.0 Release Candidate 1) with the TabbedView Shelf that still hasn't resurfaced in OS X (hopefully one day) was an improvement over NeXTStep/Openstep but never saw the light of day, unless of course you happened to have worked at NeXT and/or you worked after the merger at Apple and either worked or hung out in Engineering.
GNUstep is nowhere as elegant as NeXTStep and they know it, but you can't fault the developers since Steve hasn't ever nor will he ever open source any of that code.
The moment KDE adds native Objective-C support by working with GNUstep folks than just maybe then we'll actually see Linux and Apple really bring a one-two punch to the Enterprise. How come? If both platforms support Cocoa's Portable Distributed Objects you can leverage existing PC hardware running Linux while bringing in PowerPC Hardware with OS X/X Server and suddenly any "holes" that the Windows World claims become even more fantastical, if not just blatantly bitter sweet moans of frustration.
But no. We have people maddenly working on C# in hopes to make sure everyone can connect to .NET Services. I'm sure Microsoft doesn't mind since you still have to pay the piper, one way or another.
The design of interactive systems is an entire discipline. It is as hard and as important as software engineering. Very few software developers have even the most basic training in this area. Also, analyzing and designing interactive systems is very expensive. It takes time and it requires some sort of contact with your intended user base before you start writing code. Many projects could use external help. What we need is to call human-computer interaction experts to the game. If a few experts could buy into the free software idea and do some free (as in beer) consulting, everyone would benefit. How do you do free as in beer consulting? You publish every deliverable on the net, under a Creative Commons license. This way, HCI students will have access to the methods used in real projects. These students, in turn, will be even easier to draft. I ask you all to turn you advocacy powers in this direction.
I'll bite.....
"but for crying out loud those people are our girlfriends and/or Wives"
It's actually my BOYFIEND who's blindly addicted to OSX. I'm the one who put Yellowdog on our old iBook to make it usefull. I had to show him how to use tab-autocomplete in the terminal and how to use man pages when he couldn't remember what flags to use, for crying out loud. And I'm just a girl. Maybe it's this prejudice against the opposite sex which results in "geeks" always complaining about how they don't get the girls.
I would have no idea.... I was surprised to find that he left Red Hat as of a few days ago, though.
Although this was a long time ago it would be nice to see them bring back the option.
so many people think that art is just about how things 'LOOK',
but true art arises where form and function are integral --
-- design is not veneer - steve jobs interview in fortune magazine --
Fortune Magazine: What has always distinguished the products of the
companies you've led is the design aesthetic. Is your obsession with design
an inborn instinct or what?
Steve Jobs: We don't have good language to talk about this kind of thing.
In most people's vocabularies, design means veneer.
It's interior decorating.
It's the fabric of the curtains and the sofa.
But to me, nothing could be
further from the meaning of design.
Design is the fundamental soul of a man-made creation that ends up
expressing itself in successive outer layers of the product or service.
The iMac is not just the colour or translucence or the shape of the shell.
The essence of the iMac is to be the finest possible consumer computer
in which each element plays together.
On our latest iMac, I was adamant that we get rid of the fan, because it
is much more pleasant to work on a computer that doesn't drone all the time.
That was not just "Steve's decision" to pull out the fan; it required an
enormous engineering effort to figure out how to manage power better and do
a better job of thermal conduction through the machine. That is the furthest
thing from veneer. It was at the core of the product the day we started.
This is what customers pay us for--to sweat all these details so it's easy
and pleasant for them to use our computers. We're supposed to be really good
at this. That doesn't mean we don't listen to customers, but it's hard for
them to tell you what they want when they've never seen anything remotely
like it.