Slashdot Mirror
KDE Running on Mac OS X
GeoffP writes "AppleTalk Australia is running a story on running KDE on Mac OS X. For those that don't know, KDE is a graphical desktop environment used to access your computer's files. Finally, Mac users have a free (as in speech) approach to their filesystem."
A neat article.
However, I can't think really why you'd want to be running KDE on Mac OS X when you already have such a neat (IMHO) interface. I suppose it's good for a laugh, too.
Does the poster even realize this is simply the X server with KDE running as a client app? its not like they've replaced the nice, flashy GUI with KDE. They've just compiled and run it! Look, I can run Ethereal on OS X. Look, I can run *name unix app* on OS X. Good grief.
Cemil.
Ummm... If I wanted to run KDE, why would I buy a Mac? I mean I love my Powerbook, but I know the Pentium M systems are faster, cheaper, and (if my experiences are the rule not the exception) more reliable.
The evil monkey commands you to dance.
This has been possible for a while now. It's quite easy to set up if you use Fink. You can even set it to use apple's own built-in X11 instead of installing XFree86.
http://fink.sourceforge.net/news/kde.php
{magazine} {country} is running a story on running {app} on {platform}. For those that don't know, {app} is a {category} used to {verb} your {noun}. Finally, {platform} users have a {adjective} approach to their {noun}.
Is this an all-time low for a slashdot article? I can't imagine how it can be beaten.
Simple, it'll be duped shortly.
Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
BTW, in other news, you may want to check out this neat page (with pics!) where I describe how I retrofitted my Toyota Camry to be drawn by horses. The gas mileage I get now is astounding!
I believe it was Feynmann who said
"That's not right. It's not even wrong"
Some statements are so bizarre that they defy comment.
:wq
I guess I should write up my tutorial on how to run fluxbox on OS X, and my follow up, setting environment variables to allow Terminal.app to interact with the X server.
Do it. Don't put down documentation on any process that others might not have done - there are many MANY people who might not have the experience to come up with the solution on their own, but who may benefit from it.
The attitude that writing documentation on the simple stuff is pointless is the reason so many man pages, web pages, FAQs and howtos on open source software sucks dog nuts.
Not everyone is geek enough to know how to do some of the cool things - that knowledge comes about for those of us who are geeky enough to enjoy learning the ins and outs of everything for its own sake. Other people, the majority, need to see how something can work when set up well before they'll accept it.
KDe, for all it's open source goodness, isnt a superior system to what OSX has. I dont get why you would bother - OSX is a delight to use.
AT LAST a userfriendly GUI on Apple plattforms.
Sorry, could not resist.
A native KDE port for OS X has existed since the end of 2003.... http://dot.kde.org/1073009304/
Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
... i already tought about inventing a game where the guy with the baddest "article" posted on slashdot gets the most points, but *damn*! You already won before it even began!
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Slashdot: News for PHB and Marketing Drones.
Slashdot: Buzzwords arranged in an almost sensible order.
Slashdot: Computer News for People New to Computers
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
Finally, Mac users have a free (as in speech) approach to their filesystem.
1. KDE has been running on OS X for many years now.
2. cp, ls, mv, etc are open source, and have been available on OS X since the beginning.
3. KDE is nice, but I didn't buy a Mac so I could run KDE, I bought it so I could run OS X.
Which isn't to say it's not good to be able to run KDE if you want, just that I've never heard someone lament, "oh, that only there were some form of free (as in speech) approach to the filesystem on my Mac".
But when you take a screenshot in OS X you don't have to select and drag a box around the window you want as this author has done.
Press Apple-Shift-4, which changes your cursor to a cross-hairs, this lets you drag a box on any part of the screen and the contents are dumped to the desktop as a screenshot.
But! then press spacebar and the cursor changes to an icon of a camera, now click on the window you want to take a screenshot of, and the screenshot will be of that window only, pixel-perfect to the border.
So it looks like this and results in this.
Now you have a possibility to change your already unified and quite well designed Mac user interface with KDE! Now you have the freedom to make a really bad choice!
Yikes. That's really ugly.
Now, if someone can get Vista working on MacOS X.... (ducks and takes cover)
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
It was Wolfgang Pauli: "This isn't right, this isn't even wrong."
a ng_pauli.html
Reference: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/w/wolfg
"Place me in the company of those who seek Truth, but deliver me from those who believe to have found it."
I'm running a mish-mash of Gnome components ranging from 2.6 - 2.12 with fink.
... except for the bloody retarded keyboard shortcuts and lack of a usable alt-tab.
Darwinports also has a gnome and KDE distribution for X11 on Mac OS X.
The Gnome stuff has been a bit crazy recently, what with the menu files changing file formats and everything.
Why do I run Gnome? Simple: consistent keyboard shortcuts. On my iBook, I have too many different inconsistent ways to get home, end, pg up and pg dn - some use Fn+arrow, others use the command (apple) key. In Apple's terminal app, it's all backwards - you have to press shift+apple+arrow to get home/end, but for pg up/dn you just use apple+arrow, whereas on Linux/Solaris you use shift+pg up (which would be shift+Fn+pg up on this iBook). WTF?
Don't even get me started on the Finder's utterly, utterly useless "alt-tab" - what a pointless piece of crap. You simply _CANNOT_ switch windows with it, only applications! Great, you can switch focus to the most recently used window in one app or the most recently used window in another, but there is NO FUCKING WAY you can change amongst those app's windows without using the mouse and going to the "window" menu or using "expose" (all involve several distracted seconds on that bastard touch-pad mouse thing).
More frustratingly, apple+arrow in Apple's terminal switches between terminal windows - which is great - but I am either expecting this behaviour to get me home/end (like using apple+pg up/pg dn does), or trying to use apple + left/right arrows to switch windows in some other application that does not mimic this behaviour!
NeoOffice/J uses Fn+arrow for home/end, but Mozilla etc. use apple+arrow. Then apple's terminal uses shift+apple+arrow...
I still don't even know how to skip over words in a line of text (in Linux/windows it's ctrl+arrow, but this does nothing in most mac apps).
Sigh... I never thought I'd see the day... resorting to a gnome desktop instead of Finder. Finder has some great aspects to it; its network shares are reliable and good, and after I've installed the virtual desktops 3rd party app I feel mostly at home
It's a bloody nightmare for keyboard users. Please stop trying to make me use the touchpad... argh
Aqua goodness, brushed-metal goodness, unified tool bar grayish-ness, the new iTunes post brushed-metal dark grayish-ness, etc. Basically, whatever shinny inconstant interface turd Apple thinks is cool this month.
;)
And yes, I realize the irony of an Apple interface rant coming from some a-hole who's screen name is "Aqua OS X"
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
..how does enlightenment push an envelope? Simple. It puts some complex and attractive eye candy where, for all intents and purposes, it was never meant to be. That is to say, it pushes the limits for X11 and the unices. X11 was designed as an extremely lightweight graphical windowing system for terminals over a network, not for graphics intensive aqua-esque-sexiness. For unix users who have lived for years in minimal graphical environments, its a very new development. Apple struck a home run with Aqua using brand new innovations, yet Enlightenment accomplishments are on running on top of a 25 year old graphics subsystem. Interesting in context, dont you think?
Do you get 40 furlongs to the bushel?
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
This is kinda useful on the new iBooks that would like to run a more linux-y interface, but still want wireless support (the airport extreme cards use a closed-source broadcom chip-set that will never be opened due to FCC regulations). You can just run your qt / gtk programs in your respective window manager and run all the programs you can either find on fink, or anything else you can get to compile correctly (good luck). Obviously the down-side to this is that you can't run an OS X apps, but if you just log out it will throw you back to the OS X log-in screen.
What I would really like to see (calling out to the talended /. developer community) would be a way to initiate sessions on OS X, so that the ctrl-alt-F* would give you a different session -- one running quartz/aqua, and one running Xfree86/Xorg. Say hello to the best of both worlds -- the window manager of your choice right at your finger-tips!