Eugenia writes "The Gnome Project announcedtoday that the ClearLooks theme engine will be the default theme for the Gnome 2.12 (to be released around September). This was a much needed refresh of the Gnome default desktop (old theme, new theme screenshots)."
Allmost noone ...
by
GNUALMAFUERTE
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Uses the default theme anyway, that the beautiness of having themes, but for those that hasn't used gnome or gnu/linux at all, the first impression will be important...
KDE made a good job choosing Keramik as the default theme, before that, they allways shipped the ugliest one.
ALMAFUERTE
-- WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Re:Allmost noone ...
by
croddy
·
· Score: 5, Funny
what? there are ones uglier than keramik ???
Re:Allmost noone ...
by
GNUALMAFUERTE
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Ok, Keramik is ugly, and it's not something one would call ellegant, but it's rounded and has some nice effects, like alpha-blending, and that's what people want to see. It may not be the most beautiful thing out there, but it's better than the default square gray buttons.
-- WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Re:Allmost noone ...
by
Quattro+Vezina
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The theme they used before Keramik (in versions 2.x and 3.0.x) was pretty good. I like it a lot, though I prefer the Light Style 2nd Revision widget style (NOT 3rd revision) and the Pale Gray colour scheme.
Keramik, on the other hand, was a massive mistake that seriously damaged KDE's reputation. I've heard on various boarda about how KDE looks like a hyperactive 12-year-old girl drew it. That's only half-true. Keramik looks like a hyperactive 12-year-old girl drew it. KDE can look incredibly good if you're not using Keramik, and it's a damn shame that Keramik is so ugly that it turns people off to KDE as a whole. I'm still pissed at whoever developer had the braindead idea of making Keramik the default style.
Plastik is a dramatic improvement on Keramik, but it's still a tad too flashy for my tastes, and the bloody huge window decorations are just a waste of space.
Re:Allmost noone ...
by
Narchie+Troll
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No. No, it isn't.
Keramik is ugly and nearly unusable, and makes KDE look like a big piece of shit.
Re:Allmost noone ...
by
vrt3
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I don't understand why everybody seems to love Bitstream Vera. It doesn't look nice to me, though I can't explain exactly why. It's also less easily readable compared to, for example, Georgia. See this example: on the left is Bitstream Vera serif, on the right is Georgia, both the same size. Despite the Bitstream letters being larger than the Georgia ones, I find the text on the right *much* easier to read.
Of course, Bitstream is Free and Georgia is not, but that doesn't change the fact that I find Georgia much prettier.
-- This sig under construction. Please check back later.
Oh, big news here
by
Lord+Bitman
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Gnome is made to look like whatever windows currently looks like? Unheard of!
Copying windows will not get you anywhere. Innovate, damnit!
-- -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Re:Oh, big news here
by
GNUALMAFUERTE
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Actually, GNOME had Themes when windows hab static GUI, Microsoft introduced a theme engine in 2002, but Gnome had one way before, and had pretty good themes at that time. In this case, M$ coppied GNOME/KDE.
-- WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Re:Oh, big news here
by
theantix
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Gnome is made to look like whatever windows currently looks like? Unheard of!
Copying windows will not get you anywhere. Innovate, damnit!
So uh, what version of windows does that look like? The one with the hideous malformed "start" button, the one with a cartoonishly unprofessional colour scheme, or the one that doesn't exist yet?
To me it looks a hell of a lot more like OSX than it does Windows, if you get beyond the widget set. But there is a hell of a lot more to Gnome than the maximize window widget, for example the open/save dialogs and desktop preferences are quite different from the windows methodology. To judge a desktop entirely by three widgets is just foolhardy...
From what I've seen of the gnome project, everything in the UI is too pronounced. For example, does the menu bar need all of the icons with a bold highlight around them? Why does the title/menu bar have to take up 25% of the window? Small subdued cues would be grand in a UI. We all eventually know where to click anyways right? For as much as I dislike the classic Windows 2000 UI, it still is not nearly as intrusive as gnome or kde as far as I am concerned. I guess there are some skins out there that probably give me what I want, but we really need something that is slick out of the box, something that doesn't work just like Windows. The Mac GUI creator just passed away (God bless his soul) and we haven't really come up with anything better in the last 30 years? Hell, even Nextstep and OS/2 were steps in a better direction.
If you ask me, there will never be a year of the Linux desktop until somebody creates a Linux desktop environment that is at least as rich as Windows. When is cut and paste going to be even supported across applications in KDE or GNOME? Oh, text works ok? Well what about a piece of a picture or a clip of a wave? What about drag and drop? Can I just drop any document onto a printer icon and have it spit out the result? Without configuring 20 various text files?
When the big boys like Adobe start releasing Photoshop for Linux, then perhaps there will be some sort of market, but until then I hear that the GIMP is fine as long as you don't need to work in CMYK.
Re:I gotta say
by
GNUALMAFUERTE
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"Can I just drop any document onto a printer icon and have it spit out the result?"
Can i just make a few modifications to the windows source and pass it over to a friend?
Compared to the scope of the second question, the first one is irrelevant.
Not everything is about functionality, remember, it's not called "Faster Software", nor "Slicker Software", it's called "Free Software", because it's goal is to bee Free to all it's users, and let the users be free to do whatever they wan with they computer without relying on big corporations managing their lifes and ideas.
Would you trade your freedom for nice icons?, I value my freedom a lot more than that.
-- WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Re:I gotta say
by
LWATCDR
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"Can i just make a few modifications to the windows source and pass it over to a friend?
Compared to the scope of the second question, the first one is irrelevant." No not really. Maybe to you but to most people software is a tool not a religion or a political statement. Even now what percentage of Linux users will ever compile a program much less modify the source code to the kernel? Software that is hard to use no matter how "free" is still bad software.
-- See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:I gotta say
by
webfiend
·
· Score: 2, Informative
If you ask me, there will never be a year of the Linux desktop until somebody creates a Linux desktop environment that is at least as rich as Windows.
That's okay. I use Linux on my desktop and have for most of the last five years. I don't really need a "year" of the desktop. All I needed was for it work on my desktop and it's been doing that quite nicely for some time.
When is cut and paste going to be even supported across applications in KDE or GNOME?
Well, text works okay...
Oh, text works ok? Well what about a piece of a picture or a clip of a wave?
Well, um, text works okay. I haven't tried anything else so I couldn't really tell you. Then again, my only exposure to pictures or sound clips in my clipboard was when Windows tried to tell me that I had a huge lump of something in my clipboard whenever I tried to quit Photoshop. So you and I definitely don't have the same needs for this particular item.
What about drag and drop? Can I just drop any document onto a printer icon and have it spit out the result? Without configuring 20 various text files?
I never dig figure out the 20 various text files to configure, but I've been able to drag a file icon onto my printer icon and have it print (correctly, even!) since around Fedora Core 2, so yeah, that works now.
... then perhaps there will be some sort of market...
There already is a market, it's just not people stuck on waiting for Photoshop to come out for a particular platform. Besides, the words "Linux" and "market" just don't seem to go together in my mind. One doesn't really seem to need the other, and both will do quite nicely if they never meet each other. But maybe that's just me. I know Redhat and SuSE and Mandrake (and so on) must see some sort of market in Linux geeks, or they never would have bothered trying to make money from us in the first place.
But hey, I'm not going to tell you that you need to use Linux if what you really need is a platform that can run Photoshop natively. You and me, we're different markets.
Re:I gotta say
by
Mornelithe
·
· Score: 3, Informative
When is cut and paste going to be even supported across applications in KDE or GNOME? Oh, text works ok? Well what about a piece of a picture or a clip of a wave?
I just went into kview, copied part of a picture, and pasted it into the GIMP. Then I went into kpdf, copied part of a page, and pasted that into the GIMP. Then I copied part of a page in kpdf, and pasted it into a konqueror window, and it asked me what filename I'd like, and turned it into a PNG image.
I don't have any sound editing software, so I can't test anything there.
Without configuring 20 various text files?
I haven't used text files to configure printers in a long time. With CUPS and KDE, you can just use their printer install wizard. It's about the same as installing a printer on Windows.
--
I've come for the woman, and your head.
Re:I gotta say
by
nathanh
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
No not really. Maybe to you but to most people software is a tool not a religion or a political statement.
Maybe to you software is just a tool but to many others it's a core component in their business.
Software is not really like a tool at all. No other tool integrates so tightly with your business processes, your other systems, your data, and your policies. Consider all the companies that have found themselves stuck with Exchange, or Notes, or Groupwise, and due to the lock-in nature of the software they are unable to migrate to anything else. This isn't a "tool". It's a system with hooks into almost every aspect of the enterprise. Tugging at even the slightest part of the system causes breakage elsewhere, often in non-obvious locations. Those hooks might be a tiny programming language that HR decided to use to implement their timesheet system (Notes), or it might be the calendaring system that has turned into a building meeting room manager (Exchange). Whatever the hook, it ties you to that product and becomes a core part of your business. Changing it isn't easy. Sometimes changing it is impossible.
The reality is that it's pragmatic to use and only use free software. Putting your business software in the hands of a proprietary software vendor is naive. You are hoping that the vendor doesn't screw you; either by deprecating the softare, or breaking it, or raising the price, or whatever. But to the very nature of capitalism, the vendors are constantly thinking of new ways to screw you!
Even now what percentage of Linux users will ever compile a program much less modify the source code to the kernel?
Irrelevant. How many people will run for local office? Very few, but that doesn't mean democracy is a failed concept. The benefit of free software isn't that I personally can modify the source, but that anybody is free to do so.
Software that is hard to use no matter how "free" is still bad software.
Yes, but like the grandfather poster, I often use "bad software" that is free in preference to "good software" that is not free, for certain values of "good", "bad", and "free". For example, I use Linux and GNOME instead of MacOS X as my desktop. As a counter-example, I use IOS instead of Linux for my routers.
It's a balancing act. For my desktop I'd been burnt so often by vendor lock-in and forced upgrades that I finally got sick of it and migrated to Linux (back in 1992). Now MacOS X is tempting, but not tempting enough that I'll give up the freedom I enjoy with Linux. However with routing the value of IOS so exceeds the potential value with Linux that I'm willing to compromise freedom, secure in the knowledge that IOS is at least standards compliant.
I do not think you understand where the parent post is coming from. The basic idea is it did not work in Red Hat 1 so therefore it does not work in Linux, at all, ever.
Re:Wow
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Look -- if you don't like the way the theme works, just say so. Don't be mean.
rounded corners of the windows
by
eraserewind
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Looking at those screenshots, one thing bugs me. Can't they do some anti-aliasing on the rounded corners of the windows? Those jagged edges don't look nice at all. Also the "X" button looks too big, and is too pointy for the rounded corners. Win XP has knocked the points off the 3 window control buttons, and it looks like a better match. The theme itself is ok, if a bit on the dull side.
Re:rounded corners of the windows
by
daniel+borgmann
·
· Score: 5, Informative
No, the corners unfortunately can't be anti-aliased right now. That's one of the things we need composite for.:) I'm sure Havoc will support it quickly after composite becomes available by default.
Also I made the icons smaller in the latest release of the metacity theme, you can get it here: http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?cont ent=212 37
I don't think it's perfect yet, the main focus has been on the Gtk engine.
Re:rounded corners of the windows
by
DaveJay
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I guess I'm a freak. I -like- the aliased corners, because it reminds me of an old mac desktop. For me, anti-aliased everything is just blurry and overrated -- I'll take crisp well-defined edges any day of the week.
darwinports
by
OmniVector
·
· Score: 2, Informative
if you're using os x, you can try it out in darwinports by typing
port install gtk2-clearlooks
-- - tristan
factoid
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Less is definitely more.
by
JPyObjC+Dude
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Personally, I would vote for Gnome over KDE. Gnome's strict adherence to GUI standards where less is more will get them to a lot more usage in the future. KDE, although very feature friendly, is not nearly as refined as Gnome from a UI perspective and this will bite them in the ass as it has bit Microsoft.
When I look at the latest screenshots, I am blown away with the finite details that the UI designers have gone through. Most importantly, they seem to have stuck with the minimal real estate impact that I have come to love with OSX.
Real estate is where Microsoft have failed in the past with XP sytles and from what I have seen with their replacements, they are only getting worse with tons of real estate taken up by oversized and over spaced text on pretty but poorly contrasted backgrounds.
Keep up the good work Gnome... You are the best bet for me to move to Linus or *bsd besides OSX.
JsD
Side bit - L&M of car manufacturers. Honda (Apple)
- Less but works more but better General Motors (Microsoft)
- More but works less and worse.
Re:Can't Gnome just die?
by
Mornelithe
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
And my reasoning for slow: What exactly you have here is Application on top of KDE lib on top of Qt lib on top of X11 lib on top of X11 server on top of Linux
Okay.
Windows? Application on Windows API on Win32 GUI on Win Kernel
Wrong. You left out MFC, or whatever equivalent overlay on top of the Windows API you're using. Most people don't program in the straight Windows API anymore, and even if they don't use MFC, they write their own wrapper around the Windows API.
And, correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of stuff in the KDE libs is just KDE standard widgets that aren't part of Qt. So it's more like kdelibs + Qt is one layer if you're developing KDE applications. It's just artificially split in some ways. It's a lot like how some widgets are in the Gnome libs, and others are in GTK+. In fact, I believe some widgets get pushed from Gnome libs into GTK+, because they are more generally useful.
The number of "layers" is irrelevant. For example, Qt can be split into a section that deals with GUI widgets, and a section that deals with making C++ programming nicer. If Trolltech chose to market them separately, would you call that two layers, and say that KDE must be even slower because of this?
By the way, was that your explanation of why you believe the slowness you have actually perceived is happening, or were you saying that "5 layers is too many, therefore it must be slow"? I'm unsure on that point. KDE isn't slow on my computer, and it's more than 3 years old (the computer, that is). What are you running it on?
Finally, I'm curious: What isn't integrated about KDE? And have you filed bugs/wishlists to alert the developers?
--
I've come for the woman, and your head.
Re:Great Windows...
by
Sentry21
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Wow, I've never seen well-done ugly icons before. The attention to detail in these icons is great (much better than Windows), but the icon design I have to say is ugly, blocky, and uninspired. It reminds me of the icons from System 6-7 & MacOS 8, which were great for their time compared to Windows, but are boring now. Why on earth would Gnome go from a blocky squared-off theme to a smooth, contoured one, and then go and make a blocky squared-off icon set the default?
If these are set as the default icons, I will swiftly change them.
I knew it wouldn't take long...
by
BrokenHalo
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
... for the flames to get fanned back and forth between Gnome and KDE.
The whole point of themes is that you customise them to how YOU want them to look.
So if you think it's fugly, change it.:-)
I've been a big fan of Gnome since ~1997 and used to hate KDE with a passion, but recently as an experiment I took the time to customise a KDE desktop to look almost identical to my Gnome desktop, and found it actually wasn't that bad (in some respects superior to Gnome), so I actually now use KDE more often.
Funny, when I run KDE I feel like there are so many toolbars, and the icons are so big, that it takes up too much real estate...and when I use gnome (debian), I feel like it's simple and small and tidy.
Doesn't it make you wonder if each of us is missing some obscure setting somewhere?
Actually, the "Human" theme that Ubuntu uses as default is based on Industrial (slightly different colours, and square corners on the windows). This may change in the future though.
WTF? You mean....
by
Korgan
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Okay... When did people stop using this great Emacs? I mean... Graphical interfaces? Wow! Who'da thunk it. Thats just a totally innovative and novel idea.
What? I can change the way my interface looks so it suits my own personal tastes and preferences? OMG! Someone get on the phone and tell Microsoft, they're gonna want to embrace that idea. They already do? Damn, they're on the ball. What? They got the idea from KDE and Gnome? OMG! Isn't that like stealing? Xerox? Apple Computer? Who are they again?
</>
It amazes me to see how so quickly the whole fight between KDE and Gnome sprang up over something as simple as the new DEFAULT THEME for Gnome being announced. Its not like people can't change the theme for either KDE or Gnome if they don't like the defaults. I thought the whole Keramilk issue was put to rest a long time ago. Guess not. Must've missed that memo. Sorry, didn't mean to stay out of the fight for so long.
Come one people. Get real. Personally, I think it looks good. Its clean, open, totally uncluttered (like some KDE shots I've seen recently) and its functional. Its pretty easy to navigate and it keeps with the K.I.S.S principle I have always liked in Gnome (KDE was always too cluttered with too many bells and whistles presented to the average end user. Might be fine for advanced users, but generally the newer users prefer not to get a whole heap of stuff thrown at them when all they want to do is configure their desktop).
But who cares? If you use Gnome and you don't like this theme, install a different one. There are so many available out there. Hell, I even went as far as making my own (*GASP*) so that my desktop looked and felt the way I wanted it to so I was more productive and it was useful to me.
Damn... Lets badmouth a clean and easy on the eyes interface simply because it bears some resemblance to Windows XP. Damn... Last time I looked, every Window Manager had 3 buttons at the top of their windows for minimize,maximize/restore,close. Even OS X.
If it really is that much of an issue, don't you dear look at FVWM. Maybe you should go check out Enlightenment again. Its not dead you know. In fact, some of use still use it every day. Then you can really make your desktop look any and every way you could possibly want it to. Amazing that.
Gotta love the fact that you can choose what interface your desktop has. In fact, if you really wanted to, you could set your.xinitrc to pick a different one at random every time you started X. Now theres a really far out idea.
Re:Can't Gnome just die?
by
stuuf
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
How portable are the Windows or Mac OS X widget sets? The fact that they're both named for an operating system is a clue. Splitting into numerous layers is one of the ways that many open source projects are so portable. Gnome sits on GTK which uses Glib and GDK, on top of either X11/POSIX or Win32. On windows, there is almost always an extra layer such as VCL, MFC, or WxWidgets above the windows API, because it's so hideous to use directly. The layers don't necessarily have anything to do with speed. I think that the small slowdowns and large code size is a reasonably tradeoff for making applications more portable and easier to write. Sure, writing Mozilla in C++, Javascript, and several proprietary compatibility libraries makes it bigger and slower than a pure C application, but also much easier to port and maintain.
I use the Gnome desktop, file manager, and some small utilities, but third party apps for most work. Gnome has Epiphany; I use Mozilla. Gnome has Gcalctool, I use Qalculate. Gnome has gedit, I use XEmacs or Leafpad.
--
Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it
Just one thing..
by
omega9
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Slashdot Mirror
Uses the default theme anyway, that the beautiness of having themes, but for those that hasn't used gnome or gnu/linux at all, the first impression will be important ...
KDE made a good job choosing Keramik as the default theme, before that, they allways shipped the ugliest one.
ALMAFUERTE
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Gnome is made to look like whatever windows currently looks like? Unheard of!
Copying windows will not get you anywhere. Innovate, damnit!
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
A great step up.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
From what I've seen of the gnome project, everything in the UI is too pronounced. For example, does the menu bar need all of the icons with a bold highlight around them? Why does the title/menu bar have to take up 25% of the window? Small subdued cues would be grand in a UI. We all eventually know where to click anyways right? For as much as I dislike the classic Windows 2000 UI, it still is not nearly as intrusive as gnome or kde as far as I am concerned. I guess there are some skins out there that probably give me what I want, but we really need something that is slick out of the box, something that doesn't work just like Windows. The Mac GUI creator just passed away (God bless his soul) and we haven't really come up with anything better in the last 30 years? Hell, even Nextstep and OS/2 were steps in a better direction.
If you ask me, there will never be a year of the Linux desktop until somebody creates a Linux desktop environment that is at least as rich as Windows. When is cut and paste going to be even supported across applications in KDE or GNOME? Oh, text works ok? Well what about a piece of a picture or a clip of a wave? What about drag and drop? Can I just drop any document onto a printer icon and have it spit out the result? Without configuring 20 various text files?
When the big boys like Adobe start releasing Photoshop for Linux, then perhaps there will be some sort of market, but until then I hear that the GIMP is fine as long as you don't need to work in CMYK.
zosxavius photography
Look -- if you don't like the way the theme works, just say so. Don't be mean.
Looking at those screenshots, one thing bugs me. Can't they do some anti-aliasing on the rounded corners of the windows? Those jagged edges don't look nice at all. Also the "X" button looks too big, and is too pointy for the rounded corners. Win XP has knocked the points off the 3 window control buttons, and it looks like a better match. The theme itself is ok, if a bit on the dull side.
- tristan
This news factoid is merely rumour.
Please read this for more information.
Personally, I would vote for Gnome over KDE. Gnome's strict adherence to GUI standards where less is more will get them to a lot more usage in the future. KDE, although very feature friendly, is not nearly as refined as Gnome from a UI perspective and this will bite them in the ass as it has bit Microsoft.
... You are the best bet for me to move to Linus or *bsd besides OSX.
When I look at the latest screenshots, I am blown away with the finite details that the UI designers have gone through. Most importantly, they seem to have stuck with the minimal real estate impact that I have come to love with OSX.
Real estate is where Microsoft have failed in the past with XP sytles and from what I have seen with their replacements, they are only getting worse with tons of real estate taken up by oversized and over spaced text on pretty but poorly contrasted backgrounds.
Keep up the good work Gnome
JsD
Side bit - L&M of car manufacturers.
Honda (Apple)
- Less but works more but better
General Motors (Microsoft)
- More but works less and worse.
And my reasoning for slow: What exactly you have here is Application on top of KDE lib on top of Qt lib on top of X11 lib on top of X11 server on top of Linux
Okay.
Windows? Application on Windows API on Win32 GUI on Win Kernel
Wrong. You left out MFC, or whatever equivalent overlay on top of the Windows API you're using. Most people don't program in the straight Windows API anymore, and even if they don't use MFC, they write their own wrapper around the Windows API.
And, correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of stuff in the KDE libs is just KDE standard widgets that aren't part of Qt. So it's more like kdelibs + Qt is one layer if you're developing KDE applications. It's just artificially split in some ways. It's a lot like how some widgets are in the Gnome libs, and others are in GTK+. In fact, I believe some widgets get pushed from Gnome libs into GTK+, because they are more generally useful.
The number of "layers" is irrelevant. For example, Qt can be split into a section that deals with GUI widgets, and a section that deals with making C++ programming nicer. If Trolltech chose to market them separately, would you call that two layers, and say that KDE must be even slower because of this?
By the way, was that your explanation of why you believe the slowness you have actually perceived is happening, or were you saying that "5 layers is too many, therefore it must be slow"? I'm unsure on that point. KDE isn't slow on my computer, and it's more than 3 years old (the computer, that is). What are you running it on?
Finally, I'm curious: What isn't integrated about KDE? And have you filed bugs/wishlists to alert the developers?
I've come for the woman, and your head.
Wow, I've never seen well-done ugly icons before. The attention to detail in these icons is great (much better than Windows), but the icon design I have to say is ugly, blocky, and uninspired. It reminds me of the icons from System 6-7 & MacOS 8, which were great for their time compared to Windows, but are boring now. Why on earth would Gnome go from a blocky squared-off theme to a smooth, contoured one, and then go and make a blocky squared-off icon set the default?
If these are set as the default icons, I will swiftly change them.
The whole point of themes is that you customise them to how YOU want them to look.
So if you think it's fugly, change it. :-)
I've been a big fan of Gnome since ~1997 and used to hate KDE with a passion, but recently as an experiment I took the time to customise a KDE desktop to look almost identical to my Gnome desktop, and found it actually wasn't that bad (in some respects superior to Gnome), so I actually now use KDE more often.
At the risk of being modded redundant, my first thought was bluecurve.
Funny, when I run KDE I feel like there are so many toolbars, and the icons are so big, that it takes up too much real estate...and when I use gnome (debian), I feel like it's simple and small and tidy.
Doesn't it make you wonder if each of us is missing some obscure setting somewhere?
Actually, the "Human" theme that Ubuntu uses as default is based on Industrial (slightly different colours, and square corners on the windows). This may change in the future though.
Okay... When did people stop using this great Emacs? I mean... Graphical interfaces? Wow! Who'da thunk it. Thats just a totally innovative and novel idea.
What? I can change the way my interface looks so it suits my own personal tastes and preferences? OMG! Someone get on the phone and tell Microsoft, they're gonna want to embrace that idea. They already do? Damn, they're on the ball. What? They got the idea from KDE and Gnome? OMG! Isn't that like stealing? Xerox? Apple Computer? Who are they again?
</>
It amazes me to see how so quickly the whole fight between KDE and Gnome sprang up over something as simple as the new DEFAULT THEME for Gnome being announced. Its not like people can't change the theme for either KDE or Gnome if they don't like the defaults. I thought the whole Keramilk issue was put to rest a long time ago. Guess not. Must've missed that memo. Sorry, didn't mean to stay out of the fight for so long.
Come one people. Get real. Personally, I think it looks good. Its clean, open, totally uncluttered (like some KDE shots I've seen recently) and its functional. Its pretty easy to navigate and it keeps with the K.I.S.S principle I have always liked in Gnome (KDE was always too cluttered with too many bells and whistles presented to the average end user. Might be fine for advanced users, but generally the newer users prefer not to get a whole heap of stuff thrown at them when all they want to do is configure their desktop).
But who cares? If you use Gnome and you don't like this theme, install a different one. There are so many available out there. Hell, I even went as far as making my own (*GASP*) so that my desktop looked and felt the way I wanted it to so I was more productive and it was useful to me.
Damn... Lets badmouth a clean and easy on the eyes interface simply because it bears some resemblance to Windows XP. Damn... Last time I looked, every Window Manager had 3 buttons at the top of their windows for minimize,maximize/restore,close. Even OS X.
If it really is that much of an issue, don't you dear look at FVWM. Maybe you should go check out Enlightenment again. Its not dead you know. In fact, some of use still use it every day. Then you can really make your desktop look any and every way you could possibly want it to. Amazing that.
Gotta love the fact that you can choose what interface your desktop has. In fact, if you really wanted to, you could set your .xinitrc to pick a different one at random every time you started X. Now theres a really far out idea.
I use the Gnome desktop, file manager, and some small utilities, but third party apps for most work. Gnome has Epiphany; I use Mozilla. Gnome has Gcalctool, I use Qalculate. Gnome has gedit, I use XEmacs or Leafpad.
Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it
Sorry, but this story is bullshit.
All spelled out here.
I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
It is interesting to learn how many themes we apparently ripped off without ever having seen them. ;)