Slashdot Mirror
Enlightenment Returns To Bring Ubuntu To ARM
mu22le writes "Enlightenment, the daring window manager that disappeared from our collective radar years ago, is back to bring Ubuntu to ARM. The bet that E developers made years ago to neglect 3D, compositing, and make a fast and versatile 2.5d engine may have finally paid off. The current popularity of ARM-based devices could be a niche that the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries can fill comfortably."
What is this? A config file for ants? How can we expect to increase the font size if we can't event read the words?
E17 doesn't give you the option to do that without going into the config files and manually editing them. It's not something that is any problem for more experienced Linux users but it is the kind of thing that may hurt adoption of E-17 Ubuntu.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
The problem with inner beauty is that it's usually hidden under several layers of outer ugly.
no, the light from the monitor alerts the nazis, he meant anne frank
Hardware will catch up in due course.
For each and every hardware that catches up and gives you $n hours of battery life there will always be hardware that chooses to not catch up, and as result gives you 2*$n hours of battery life.
Personally, I disable animations on every computer I use just because they are wasting my time. 3D effects are nice for a few minutes, but become irrelevant after that. The important part of a window is not its decorations, it's the client area.
It's Ubuntu that package the whole thing and decide on the default font size.
E only plays the part of supplying the critically needed libraries.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Because at this point Apple's computers and OS are _by far_ the most conservative in appearance compared to other major players.
Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
Your comment would make sense if EFL/E17 did not already support OpenGL ES on embedded devices. Illume, the E17 variant designed for mobile/embedded devices, already runs quite well with hardware/OpenGL acceleration on platforms like Maemo, and I already have built and successfully run EFL-based OpenGL apps on the Palm Pre (available in the WebOS Internals WIDK tree).
Evas was designed from the ground up to be modular and support every graphics platform known to man. Windows GDI, DirectX, iPhone OS, X11, WebOS, native Linux Framebuffer, SDL, OpenGL, OpenGL ES - you name it, EFL runs on it. Evas will take advantage of hardware acceleration when it is available, but benchmarks actually show that in many instances, when it comes to regular UI graphics operations, OpenGL/hardware accelerated interfaces don't necessarily perform better than Evas' own software engine and in several cases are actually worse -- on the Palm Pre, for example, GLES is actually much slower at doing things like alpha blending. So in that respect, yes, hardware does have some catching up to do.
Am I a hipster-doofus?
The elephant in the room is that the only reason that anyone is considering E17 is that there are no proper drivers for the hardware. The current generation of ARM SoCs that are being used for this kind of application all come with a GPU that can handle OpenGL ES 2.0. That means that they have a fully programmable pipeline and are massively overpowered for running something like Compiz. With proper drivers, they could handle pretty much any effects that you wanted to throw at them, including things like ripple effects (which require pixel shaders).
E17 doesn't use 3D acceleration, so it suddenly has an advantage when you are on a platform with missing 3D drivers. Add 3D drivers, and suddenly E17 is using the CPU while everything else is using the GPU, and E17 will be dumped because it gives you less battery life.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Only if you move them. The Exposé sequence is based on the position of the windows on your desktop. It's not random. If none of your windows move, the order won't change.
Unless a window has opened or closed. If you now have an odd number of windows, then there is a significant chance that all of your windows have moved. If you now have an even number of windows, then at least the apps on the last line have moved.
You could always try clicking on the application's icon in the Dock, which is always on the screen (unless you move it). Those icons don't move, either, unless you move them.
Uh, the Dock is a gigantic failure in UI because it expands and contracts as new icons appear, representing new windows. Only if all the apps you use are pinned will the dock begin to work as you suggest, but every time you connect a removable device, insert a CD, or experience a popup window from the OS, everything in the Dock moves. So you are lying...
Just like Exposé windows.
Yes, just like you lied about those.
In MacOS I can cut and paste files to move them to a new folder.
I assume you mean can't. With good reason: it breaks the metaphor. When you cut text and fail to paste it, it disappears.
So what? Windows solves this fine by fading icons you've cut. Or maybe that's patented? Snicker.
Moving isn't exactly difficult: just open up adjacent Finder windows and drag.
Harder for some people with trouble using the mouse.
Keyboard users can use mv in Terminal.
Enjoy the lengthy Apple paths. Also, using mv breaks the metaphor (snicker #2) of directories-as-Apps-with-a-single-icon.
Linux with Compiz presents a superior interface to OSX because it does all the stuff OSX does but better and more configurable. I disabled my gnome-panel and use avant-window-navigator from the AWN testing team PPA, and I use compiz' hot corners to give me a live mipmapped view of my four virtual desktops in one corner, and to line up all my windows (again, mipmapped and nice and smooth) when I mouse to the other corner. And I get to retain all the keyboard-controlled goodness at the same time. OSX has somewhat smoother animations since Xgl was canned, and while we wait for a replacement to not suck, but I don't need the magic lamp effect to my dock. It is kind of nice, though, and I miss it a little. So I'll give OSX one consolation point.
Don't pretend that OSX's lack of configurability is an asset. It is not. Having one default behavior is valuable, but preventing choice is not a benefit to the user. It is a benefit to the company. And when people see my Compiz desktop, they start throwing rocks at actual macs. Of course, to be fair, when people see iLife, they start throwing rocks at Linux... but that's not because of the OS GUI.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"