Enlightenment Lives

Anonymous Coward writes "The Enlightenment Project, far from dead, is pleased to announce the DR16.7.1 release of the Enlightenment Window Manager. With tons of fixes, a massive overhaul of the internals, and several new features this release is a must try for those who haven't run E in a long time. The window manager that redefined the way a desktop can look is still going strong."

Comments

cool to see it get fixes

[quelrods]

It's cool to see E is still alive. I've been using it as my wm for many years and haven't found anything else that does virtual desktops just the way I enjoy them. Does anyone know if they fixed the mozilla related focus bugs?

Re:cool to see it get fixes

[AstroDrabb]

But why is it? All the X-WMs look shabby, slapdash and incomplete compared to MacOSX and even, dare I say it... WinXP.

To be fair, I thing E does better than most... more attuned to my taste than KDE or GNOME. But why must we have hundreds of hours of development hours go into something which is inferior to the two market leaders? Sure there are Lunix/BSD vs Windows/Mac arguments/fests all time time, but no Linux/BSD WM looks or functions as polished as WinXP/MacOSX (note I am walking WM/GUI here, not OS in general).

You are obviously stating your opinion, so why not make it sound that way? I think the default WinXP desktop is childish, though the Classic desktop on WinXP is nice and usable. As for Mac OS X, I have used it far too much, and don't like the GUI at all. I am dead tired of the over done theme, and can't stand every menu bar being at the top. I will take Gnome over Mac OS X any day, though that is _my opinion_.

which is inferior to the two market leaders?

Huh? What crack are you smoking? Max OS X is _not_ a market leader. There are some sources showing Linux desktop having a higher percentage then Max OS X as of December 2003. While others show Linux at around 1% or so and Mac OS X around 3%. No matter what source you take as gospel, Neither Linux nor Mac OS X are a _leader_ when it comes to the desktop. MS has that sealed. Now if you want to talk server. Well, Mac OS X is no where on the radar, while Linux is a _very_ strong second with MS in first, percentage-wise. Linux in fact has been the fastest growning server OS for the past 4 years or so, growing faster then any other OS, including MS Windows. So please don't call Mac OS X a "market leader" in any field, since Mac OS/X has always been and always will be a niche market.

Re:Wow

[reverius]

I use iceWM as my only "desktop environment" (hahaha) on very new machines (my desktop is an Athlon XP 3000+). There's no reason to add bloat simply because your computer can handle it.

Oh no! more memory wastage...

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Enlightenment Foundation Libraries

Sheesh, just great, a third set of graphical toolkits to load in memory for nothing... Like we didn't have enough waste of memory with Qt/kdelibs and GTK/Gnomelibs having to be both loaded in memory most of the time (who restricts his choice to either Qt programs or GTK programs, but not both?)

Really, there are some times where the OpenSource approach to things isn't the right one. Sure choice of graphical toolkits is great, but do we look like stupids forcing users to have more memory to load several huge sets of similar libraries *just because* or what? I wish F/OSS folks decided to rally behind one and I'd happily follow, even if it wasn't my primary choice, for the sake of reducing the bloat...

Re:Oh no! more memory wastage...

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Add to this the fact that most people don't typically have a myriad of apps open at any given time;

You just need one, say GIMP in KDE, and there you have megabytes of additional, functionally identical code loaded in memory for nothing.

And you know what? even with 512M, when I edit really big images with GIMP, I need all the memory I can get. Memory isn't there for applications and libraries to waste as they please, it's supposed to be used for the data you create/manipulate.

Many years ago, it used to be that memory taken by applications and the OS was minimal compared to your data, simply because it was vital. Now it's the other way round, because developers have gotten comfy with Moore's law. The problem is, code grows faster than Moore's law...

Re:Oh no! more memory wastage...

[nanoakron]

Who the fuck thinks this is +5 Insightful?

It's just the insight you'd expect from combining an arrogant linux zealot who doesn't care about product coalescence to reduce redundancy with a bloated american 'honey, let's take the SUV to the ATM tonight' approach to the world.

Beautiful to see in all its unadulterated corpulence.

-Nano.

Re:E redefined the desktop?

[matusa]

Your statements are quite rude. For some reason, following gnome's irritation with imlib, bashing raster came into style. But that is another tale.

E had fully themed widgets, both for window manager utilities and the decorations themselves. Shortly thereafter I saw this creeping into other window managers and toolkits, and then windows and macs both unofficially and officially began carrying similar flexible interface enhancements. As far as this unparalleled flexibility, E _was_ the first, and the pattern I just described is no coincidence--the influence was definitely there to a not insignificant extent.

raster's a nice and very enthusiastic guy, dedicated and ambitious. Take a look at E17 if you have a moment.

(note zealotry is not the aim here--E is not even my primary; simply I hate this damned bashing)