Slashdot Mirror
IceWM 1.0.0 released
A reader wrote in with the news that IceWMIceWM has announced that they are now 1.0.0. IceWM is a window manager that strives to be simple, according to the web site, while also being fully usable in default config. It's fully Gnome compliant, and partially KDE compliant.
Something I've noticed about many of the WMs currently under development is that they seem to put a lot of energy into support for "themes". While it is an important practicality to allow users to customize the look and feel of their desktop what I see (especially under KDE and Enlightenment) is a lot of wacky features that don't seem practical.
I'd like to see more Gnome compliant window managers. Choice is a good thing. I feel like Oliver Twist actually, "Please Sir, Can I have some more?" :-)
I've tried the beta releases before 1.0.0 and personally I didn't like em. I don't think my opinion counts though, I think that E is stable and fast. Hehe. You wouldn't believe some of the flames i've gotten on those. But to me, if you really wanted windows, you'd be in windows. A taskbar shouldn't be stuck in the wm, it should be an external ap. If you want a simple wm, then KISS. Don't go putting taskbars and such in it. Use an external taskbar if you really desire one.
Restating the obvious since nineteen aught five.
I like how the poster noted that IceWM "strives to be ... KDE compliant."
"It's like this. We're really trying hard to almost work correctly sometimes with KDE."
--
odds of being killed by lighning and
Odds of being killed by lightning and winning the lottery in the same day: 1 in 2^55
Quantity will never replace quality, no matter how free it is.
This is my main beef with Linux... there's always the latest this and the latest that coming out of the community... why can't some coders take a break from working on the coolest, most bleeding edge stuff, and instead try making stuff a little easier?
If we want to take more of the Microsoft market share, we need more users.. when you compare how I can change my resolution under Windows with a single click, and I've still got X running at 640x480, now -there- is an area that needs work.
This is a huge discouragement for new users. You can't expect that when you say "this video card and modem won't work, and sound is really complicated to set up" they'll just go "oh, good, I have this extra $500 I needed to waste somehow, why dont I replace most of my hardware?"
Devilled Eggs - A disturbing little creation of mine.
I've used icewm off and on since the 0.8.x days, and have always had a fondness for it. Over the last four years, my wm has either been icewm, amiwm, or Enlightenment depending on my mood, and how stable E was at the time ;)
:) Just because something gets a 1.0 version number doesn't mean it was never stable or suitable for end users before that point. (Case in point, Enlightenment)
:) )
Icewm has come a long way, and throughout the development cycle it's always been a fast, usable window manager. It's nicely configurable, and now that it has a couple configuration GUIs, it's that much easier. It's good to see the 1.0.0 mark, and I congradulate the people behind it for their years of effort.
Somebody mentioned there being too many 'almost done' window managers in the open source world, and to them I'd like to point out that this community's definition of 'beta version' is slightly different from that of commercial software
Yes, there are a lot of window managers, and perhaps some of them didn't need to be made, but I don't see any harm in having that much more variety. It's not like your window manager choice is going to make your X apps unusable (And if it does, that window manager has Issues
KaufWM also features a dorky face and thick glasses, and will do just about anything in exchange for a copy of _The Unix Hater's Handbook_. It's not Gnome-compliant, but has been rumoured to look like an elf.
:)
See how easy it is to write a catchy headline?
Seriously, I move for Slashdot to stop posting this kind of 1.0 announcements. You can bet your ass that, as we speak, about half a million attention-thirsty Slashgeeks are hurriedly updating their pet WM projects to "1.0", with hopes of getting posted on Slashdot and scoring collaborators. So don't post this kind of thing - no exceptions.
To the editors: your English is as bad as your Perl. Please go back to grade school.
I've heard many people complain that the windows gui sucks, and that linux wm's that try to replicate its look suck by association.
However, I've never heard a good explanation as to why it sucks?
The same design concept is carried through most of the shell (with IE5 this became IE centric, but its not *that* bad, dont get me wrong, i hate ms too, but i'm not stupid about it)
-standardized key combos (cntrl-c copy, ctrl-v paste etc)
-one can get around fairly well without a mouse
-the task bar holds a lot of easy to access information (apps running, system tray, start menu)
-the start menu can be nicely customized (even further with the tweak utils).
-You can choose between an iconified desktop, and active desktop(blech) or no desktop at all (with the tweak utils).
-It's responsive in the tactile sense (buttons etc)
I'm sure someone could make a nice list of win9x gui foibles, but you could make a list twice as long for each of the popular window managers. Everyone knows M$ 'borrowed' a lot of its best gui features from the mac, and theres no reason X wm's shouldn't incorporate the same great features.
NightHawk
Set threshold at -1 FlaimBait to read this comment
One thing I like about the linux developer community is that they don't inflate their version numbers, they just use smaller increments. Some of these programs have been around for years, yet have rev numbers like 0.56.9 rather than VERSION 37 PROFESSIONAL, or worse yet the year-number scheme. They often pack a lot of development into those 0.0.1-value changes.
That way when, *gasp*, version 3.0.0 comes out, it is much cooler because you had to wait for it and you know that big-ol' whole-integer version number really means something.
Cf nethack, linux kernel, gnome, kde, enlightenment, &soforth.
Call me a geek...
JD
There seems to have been a recent trend in window managers such as IceWM and Sawmill to aim for a fast and simple (yet extensible) product which integrates well with a desktop enviroment. People are now looking to their DEs to provide them with the configurability, consistency and inter-operability that they want, and hence no longer require features such as application docks and background selection in a Window Manager. However, people still want control and choice in the feel of their X environment, at a level that shouldn't concern the DEs (a major drawback of KDE, I thought, was the overly strong link between it and kwm). We now have consistency and choice - Linux is really coming of age.
As an aside, I noticed that IceWM is released under the LGPL license. Does anyone know why this is? Also, did this prevent them from being chosen as the default GNOME window manager, when the GNOME team were looking for a lightweight replacement for E (this is before Sawmill came around)?
stability, from what I recall, has nothing to do with how many features you have in something. unless of course you've got some magic fountain of knowledge that I don't have access to. Just my 2 cents.
--
Geoff Harrison (http://mandrake.net)
Senior Software Engineer - VA Linux Labs (http://www.valinux.com)
Geoff "Mandrake" Harrison
Some Random UI Hacker
Yes, icewm has worked very well for me. I have been using various beta versions for a while now and they have been rock solid.
I'd recommend anyone to try icewm if you want a window manager that doesn't have too much clutter such as animations, but gets the job done. The default config is very usable (a Win95-type taskbar interface), but personally I have stripped it down further, to get the most minimal interface possible while still being able to do things without obscure hotkeys.
Another interesting thing is that it's in C++ (IIRC), so it might be fun to look at if you want an alternative perspective on how to write a window manager.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
The misconception that some people seem to have here is that (windowmanager with nifty features == sensible application development environment), which is not really true. For Linux to succeed, it has to get a *lot* easier to write applications, and this requires more than just WMs. KDE and GNOME are on the right track, but not nearly there yet.
Since there are preciously few examples of what a good ADE can be like, one can't really fault people for not knowing the difference. A nice example of what I'm talking about (which has the advantage that it's dead as a dodo, so I can't really be accused of advocacy) was NeXTStep. It had a degree of integration between display subsystem, API and OS that to my (naturally limited) knowledge has never been achieved elsewhere on a real, workable system (as opposed to, say, concept prototypes from academentia, which so often sound terribly nice, but are not really useable).
Anybody who knew NeXTStep will fondly remember the possibility to write applications mostly by drag-and-drop using InterfaceBuilder, and that drawing in windows was done using Postscript, which only had to be redirected if one wanted to print. Or the ability to use RenderMan streams in 3D viewports. Or the nice, orthogonal localization features. And so on.
People bought the extremely overpriced NeXT machines just in order to be able to use this ADE. At the moment Linux seems to be in a somewhat inverted situation: people use it despite the difficulties in writing GUI software for it. For Linux to _seriously_ threaten the monopoly of M$, better software development tools have to emerge. Let's not kid ourselves: KDE and GNOME in their current form are *not* contenders for prime time big productivity application development, although this may change. What one would need is a software development system that uses an unified imaging model, has a consistent class API that is not cluttered, has useable interface design and code management tools and generates nicely packaged applications that are easily localizable (my personal corollary would be: and that does not use X, but YMMV).
Unfortunately, XMas was two days ago, so we'll have to wait at least one more year ;-). But if anything along these lines happens, *that* would be worth posting as a "1.0 released" article.
just my $0.2E-32
Alexander Wilkie
P.S. Yes, I know about GNUStep, and the fact that Apple is using the old NeXT technology for its next-generation OS. The first is very slow in coming along, and the the second fact does not help us Linuxers at all.
There's a lot more than 100% of the current market to grab. There's an enormous number of people out there who aren't using anything, much less windows or linux. Look at linux's inroads in Mexico and India if you need an example.
There are far more people who don't use a computer than who are currently locked into a non-linux system. Linux's strength as a bulletproof os suitable for settop-esque consumer devices may help it grab a few of those people. Or it might not.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Okay. so from now on I'll be sure to add the tags to everything I write :) :)
you people take things so seriously, you anonymous cowards
--
Geoff Harrison (http://mandrake.net)
Senior Software Engineer - VA Linux Labs (http://www.valinux.com)
Geoff "Mandrake" Harrison
Some Random UI Hacker
that was supposed to have a in it. I thoguht plain old text would have converted it but I suppose it didn't.
--
Geoff Harrison (http://mandrake.net)
Senior Software Engineer - VA Linux Labs (http://www.valinux.com)
Geoff "Mandrake" Harrison
Some Random UI Hacker
And had you moderated it down
I would have moderated it back up.
why? Because it's a very good point.
If all the ICQ clone writers, or all the email client writers were to get together just think what a great ICQ clone, or emailer we'd have. When Helixcode was starting to write Evolution, they asked the current GNOME email client writers if they wanted to help, so that Evolution could have everything, that everyone wanted.
Admitedly there's always going to be someone who wants something more, but in programs where there's not much room for flexibilty (ICQ clones, email clients, news readers) I think it's a good point.
I always think "Bloody hell, *ANOTHER* ICQ/IM/Yahoo pager...etc clone, do we really need one more?" when I see a new one announced on Freshmeat.
Good point. Thing is, if Rasterman gets hit by a car or something, and the story gets posted under "Enlightenment", I still want to hear about it. I think Slash would be much better with a simple multiple-keywording system, along with a filter for stories containing specific keyword combinations (e.g. "release" && "announcement"). So Rob, if you're reading this, stop playing with yer IPO dollars and go write some more of that funky Perl code!
(Of course, strong AI wouldn't hurt either.)
To the editors: your English is as bad as your Perl. Please go back to grade school.
Not who, but what. Answer: usability studies. With extensive usability studies Microsoft has been able to make user interfaces, mice, keyboards, joystics etc. that most people think are great [..]
What? That just plain doesn't make any sense. People should be able to use what they like, not what a group of people thinks is the best. Plain and simple. Usability studies or not. That's part of the philosophy that has produced the free OS (GNU/Linux) that many of us use today.
People will use what they think is the best. The more people use something, the more successful it will become (in general - and especially with OSS software and community involvement). Therefore, the software that people think is the best will become 'selected' in this manner. There is no need for usability studies.
Personally, I love Linux software the way it is now. There are many different choices for anything I could possibly want to do. How exactly is this wrong?
except that Microsoft claims they have a good "user friendly" GUI, something i have never heard any linux vendor or WM-maker claim.
except that microsoft allegedly has a special department to guarantee interface usability, while linux people simply get it to the point where it works.
except that microsoft has "interface guidelines". It wrote these and asks developers to follow them so that people will get a consistant, pleasurable interface when they use it. linux has no such guidelines made by anyone, and no way to dessiminate those guidelines because of the very nature of the community and x-windows. GTK and QT come almost close but in fact nowhere near to guidelines of this sort. Microsoft, by the way, despite the fact these guidelines exist, does not follow them. (the cornerstone of their GUI is a menu with many many layers of submenus, something they claim not to do.. bad example because i myself am addicted to FinderPop, a mac os utility that allows you to browse your hard drive as a menu with many layers of submenus) Developers for windows do not often follow these guidelines. Apple computer does have a very clearly defined, clearly accessible set of "human interface guidelines". Apple follows these religiously and ensures developers do as well. The result is that in the mac os you have a consistant, pleasurable experience between almost all applications (unless you run Quicktime Player 4.0 or Sherlock 2.0), something windows does not achieve and linux does not even strive for.
except that in linux if you don't like those open dialog boxes you can change them; if you don't like part of the interface you can change it. with windows, you are stuck with whatever interface they hand you, even if it's something totally inexplicable like a web browser used as a file manager.
except that microsoft has the _ability_ to have a consistant interface because all the basic OS pieces are written by the same people. what is more they are not working under the hideous restraints and limitations of the X windows system.
the point is we should not expect as much out linux as out of MS windows. MS windows is currently an average-consumer-targeted product which sells itself solely on the basis of its GUI; Linux is not. You cannot claim Linux fails at its GUI because it does not try at its GUI and a huge number of multiple people are responsible for different tiny aspects of the GUI. This is something the Linux community must adress eventually but they have more important things to deal with right now. i've typed way too much for such a simple post.
oh, and what passes for "copy and paste" in linux is truly abysmal, but that's completely irrelivant.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
This feature has been added recently due to popular request. (doesn't require the WM really).
:)
It's documented, too.
One thing a lot of readers are missing here is the fact that it is just a Window Manager and does not claim to be the OS. IceWM is a good WM. It is light, flexible and easy to use. It makes a great alternative to fvwmX for speed and if you don't have the horsepower (or in my own case with a huge monitor that can only handle 256 colors) / ability to peruse E. GNOME or KDE it is still somewhat glitzy.
The thing our FUD friends are missing is that WM's under UNIX are different for a number of reasons, one of which is scalability. Look, you can't run winNT 4.0 on a 486 (of course that begs the question - why do you have a 486?) and expect reasonable performance. You can't run E on a 486, but you can run aewm or fvwm with no problems.
Even the standard windows GUI (which it refers to as the Operating System) has inconsistancy between versions, small but they are there. Windows, however, does not match the configurability or scalability of Linux, WM's play a part in both the configurability and scalability aspects.
That is why there are so many WM's. It is really more of a natural practicality (is that a word?) than nicety. It also gives the end user a level of enpowerment that no other system (aside from the Open Motif perhaps) gives.
" -- ow my brain hurts again -- "
> I always think "Bloody hell, *ANOTHER* ICQ/IM/Yahoo pager...etc clone, do we really need one more?" when I see a new one announced on Freshmeat.
It's really no different in the windows world. Go to www.nonags.com sometime and see how many launchpad apps and archivers there are out there, and how many of those are so half-assed you wonder why the author even bothered to publicize them.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
drifting further and further offtopic, here i go..
/window create), set up those window managers so they don't do anything redundant to the GNOME taskbar-type-thing, choose which programs you have installed somewhat carefuly, and go through and add GTK scrollbars to EVERYTHING you have included. Everything else-- KDE, redundant apps, etc. can be downloaded seperately. that's what freshmeat's for. Every distribution i've ever seen has concentrated violently on giving you _everything_ and not so heavily on how what you have relates. I can get everything at freshmeat easily-- what i don't want to do is be forced to spend a huge amount of time after i get the thing intalled tweaking the system until i've got something remotely usable. Which is why my linuxppc installation still isn't remotely consistent.
i wasn't saying the fact the guidelines did not exist was a particularly bad thing in itself-- simply that you should not expect linux programs to follow any interface guidelines, but you _should_ expect win/mac programs to follow guidelines because said guidelines exist.
> This is something the Linux community must adress eventually
>Again, this isn't an OS level thing
no.. but it is a community thing. which seems to be how the GUIIP is handling it.
Would be nice if someone would create a distribution based entirely on consistent UI-- instead of slapping in every window manager and program known to man, along with seven almost identical "term" programs (xterm, rxvt, wterm, eterm, konsole, GNOME term.. what have i missed? none of which handle copy/paste in an intelligent manner..) and a huge number of redundant utilities with almost no orginisation to it all, and different items in the menus of each window manager.. choose GNOME one or two decent window managers, _one_ good term program (and set up GNOME to use that one, and tweak IRCII so it opens that term program instead of wterm on
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts