Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Sun Wants to Make Linux 3D

Posted by Hemos on Tue Mar 23, 2004 08:47 AM
from the frantically-building-a-future dept.
gruenz writes "Linux Planet writes in this article about a project inside Sun developing "an experimental 3D successor to Java Desktop that they believe will change the way we interact with computers." A demo is available from Sun. 'In the demonstration, Jonathan Schwartz, vice president of Sun's software group, increases the transparency of a window so that you can see through it, turns a window on its side so that it sits at the edge of a screen like a book on a book shelf, turns a window completely around and leaves a note on the back, and takes a database of CDs presented as physical CDs, that you flip through, reading the labels, just as you would with real CDs, until you locate the one you want.'" It's called Looking Glass, in case you've heard that name before.
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by dupper (470576) * <adamlouis@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:47AM (#8644015) Journal
    This is Unix! [monash.edu.au]

    /Obscure?

    • by Nooface (526234) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:05AM (#8644777) Homepage
      Here are some other 3D file system visualizers:

      - FSV [sourceforge.net] is modelled after FSN, but runs on Linux. FSV lays out files and directories in 3D, geometrically representing the file system hierarchy to allow visual overview and analysis.
      [Screenshot [sourceforge.net]] | [Download [tucows.com]] (Linux)

      - Xcruiser [nooface.com] lets you fly through a filesystem in 3D as if it were interplanetary space. Directories are represented as galaxies, files are represented as planets (whose mass is determined by the file size), and symbolic links are represented as wormholes.
      [Screenshot [sourceforge.net]] | [Download [sourceforge.net]] (Linux)

      - TDFSB [hgb-leipzig.de] is a 3D filesystem browser for Linux. Take a walk through your filesystem!
      [Screenshot [hgb-leipzig.de]] | [Download [hgb-leipzig.de]] (Linux)

      - 3Dtop [nooface.com] is an extension for Windows that represents desktop icons in 3D, letting you to fly around your desktop. You can create coloured spotlights, background and floor textures, "paintings" (bitmaps), clocks, and "flags" that represent shortcuts.
      [Screenshot [3dtop.com]] | [Download [3dtop.com]] (Windows)

      - ROOMS [nooface.com] turns a Windows desktop into a 3D world. You can see the world either through a first person perspective or with a map view, and you can populate the world with sounds, animated images, and 3D icons.
      [Screenshot [rooms3d.com]] | [Download [rooms3d.com]] (Windows)

      - CubicEye [2ce.com] organizes windows into a navigable cube. Cubes can be arranged by thematic or functional subject matter, and can be explored either individually or collectively as part of a more comprehensive structure of multiple cubes representing various areas of interest.
      [Screenshot [2ce.com]] | [Download [2ce.com]] (Windows)
      • Why oh why oh why?

        It would be all very well if it was as quick and easy as menus/windows etc. but for instance navigating around in ROOMS is like quake. I don't want to take 20 seconds to run round from my projecft folder to my docs folder (for example).

        Virtual desktops do this kind of thing better too.

        I can see that if I had a VR working environment it might be good but my screen is 2d and very accessible thank you very much (especially with 2 monitors)
  • by Space cowboy (13680) * on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:48AM (#8644024) Journal
    If you look at the XDirectFB [directfb.org] screenshots you can see what it looks like using the DirectFB X-server :-) The server has the ability to make windows transparent/opaque by degree as focus is lost/gained or hidden/shown. Very nice :-)

    If this gets the go-ahead (and if it's open source), it'll be even nicer. The DirectFB X-server is still a standard 2-D environment, with all that entails. I can't see much use for attaching sticky notes to the "backs" of windows, but I'm sure someone will come up with one :-)

    Simon
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:12AM (#8644223)
      The server has the ability to make windows transparent/opaque by degree as focus is lost/gained or hidden/shown

      There's a utility called "Glass 2k" for Windows that does the same thing. It works with Windows 2000 and Windows XP - and it's completely hardware accelerated. It was mentioned in November 2001. On Slashdot [slashdot.org].

      Yawn.
    • by G4from128k (686170) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:37AM (#8644436)
      Although cool 3d interfaces are nice and do create a more intuitive user interface, the reasons that ease-of-use is so low (even on the Mac) is the problems of system configuration and the mismatch between command-oriented input systems (both GUI and CLI) versus goal-oriented users.

      Better help systems (not wizards) and more explanatory error messages would go a long way to improving ease-of-use. If computers could explain WHY they can't perform some operation (rather than THAT they can't perform some operation), it would make them les frustrating to use.

      It may not be glamorous, but translating all the system setups, command sets, and controls into something goal-oriented rather than technology oriented would be a major step toward ease-of-use (the average usuer should never need to know an acronym to configure their computer). This would mean contextual help that explains what to do in terms that reflect the goals of the user, not the minutae of the underlying technologies.

      More eye-candy will not make the machines easier to use. Better user-centric documentation, configuration, and diagnostic messages will.
      • by mwood (25379) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:21AM (#8644948)
        Time to hear from the VMS fanboy again. If you want to see what error messages *should* be, find a way to make a VMS application fail. Paraphrased, a typical VMS error stack might look like this:

        "I couldn't open that window you asked for"

        "because I couldn't initialize SOME-SUBSYSTEM"

        "because I couldn't read SOME-SPECIFIC-FILE"

        "because you are denied access to it"

        Sure beats the stuffing out of "OUT OF MEMORY" or "invalid parameter". You could think of it as various layers of the program catching the error and re-throwing it with annotations. Each layer contributes its "understanding" of the failure and, if it is well done, the user gets the complete story of what went wrong and usually has enough information to understand and correct the problem without diving into the books.
      • Exactly! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by beldraen (94534) <(chad.montplaisir) (at) (gmail.com)> on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:44AM (#8645179)
        I've been writing software for sometime now and I have gotten a lot of complements on the software I write. I follow three predominant rules when designing an interface. First, simplicity. People are used to a single data representation, like a sheet of paper. Place all related information on a single page. If editing needs to occur, allow the page to be edited. Do NOT have separate pages display and edit or multiple representations of the same information in different locations. While logically minded people can accept multiple views of the same data, most users do not have the spatial orientation abilities to be comfortable in navigating such a system. Users generally put up with it because they have no choice. Second, if a fault condition can be prevented before a user can commit the error, set the interface so that the fault cannot be committed in the first place. It is very annoying to hit a connect button only to be told that there are no connection settings. Either prevent the button from being used or pop up the method to connect. Either way, do not waste user time with things that don't work. Present the user things that do work or prevent the user from doing things that do not work. This places the burden on programmers to take responsibility of policing bad behavior; however, programmers loathe to do the work because being experts in the system they naturally avoid faults and it means more work for them that they do not perceive as a benefit. Users are not experts and should not need to be experts. They just want to get work done and rightfully expect the system to make intelligent guiding decisions since they've paid for the system to make them more productive. Finally, if a fault condition requires a modal intervention (which is very rare if you follow the previous rules), then all other fault conditions that can be possibly checked are also evaluated and tacked on to the error list. There is nothing worse than submitting something, getting an error, fixing it, submitting again, getting another error, fixing that, submitting again, getting another error...

        These three rules have served me well.
  • Sounds interesting (Score:5, Interesting)

    by plazman30 (531348) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:48AM (#8644025)
    This would be very nice to see. But I wonder if this is something that may leave the average home user confused.

    I believe the ultimate goal of Linux desktops should be to make the computer as easy to use as a Mac.

    Andy
    • Would a 3D desktop be more difficult to use ?

      There are more to it than just the desktop, but it sure is a start, and if you've tried Sun Java Desktop system .. it's VERY easy to use as well.
        • Have you even seen the video ? Does it look confusing at all ?
          It's basically a regular desktop with 3D features. I seriously don't see why you would lable it complex. The coding behind it is complex yes, but that doesn't mean the desktop is complex or difficult to use.
          • Re:Complicated (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Durandal64 (658649) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:29AM (#8644352)
            Current desktops are confusing for quite a few users. Now consider that this new interface doesn't really change the way things are done (there are still windows, menus, et cetera), just adds stuff. Granted, it's really damn cool stuff (stuff that I can see Apple using Quartz Extreme to do sometime down the road), but it will confuse the shit out of computer novices.
    • by Jugalator (259273) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:58AM (#8644103) Journal
      I believe the ultimate goal of Linux desktops should be to make the computer as easy to use as a Mac.

      Why not easier? :-)
    • by WTFmonkey (652603) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:06AM (#8644178)
      Yeah, it seems like it'd have a very high Coolness Factor, which usually bears an inverse relationship to the Usefulness Factor.

      The first example that comes to mind is the CD thing mentioned in the blurb. Why the hell would I want to flip through CDs? That's the EXACT REASON I ripped them to my computer to start with, was so I could see a nice, flat list rather than hundreds of individual CDs.

      Flipping a window around to put a note on the back seems like the kind of dumbass thing I'd do with my homework, and then I'd forget I wrote the note and totally ignore it anyways. Come on, on the back??

      Like I said, sounds very cool, if not all that useful. I'd rather put that extra 3D rendering power into some badass games, personally. Offtopic, but I was playing through Freespace again last night (for about the fourth time). What a great game! I love the "spaceships fly like airplanes" genre and there just haven't been enough recently. That's what we need... not "easy as a Mac," but "as fun as a PC."

      • by anonicon (215837) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:29AM (#8645025)
        The ultimate goal of Linux desktops should be the ability to set it up to work exactly the way you want it to, not to imitate the Mac.

        I don't give a shit about the average home user.


        Call me silly, but you just contradicted yourself. If the average home user wants to it to imitate a Mac or W2K or Fisher-Price Speak and Spell, I agree that Linux shoud let them.

        I don't think the goal of Linux desktops should be to take away all the things I like about them.

        Problem is, ask 1,000 people what they like about the Linux desktop and you'll get little agreement. Besides, an experienced hacker will have a lot fewer problems re-configuring their desktop from a basic setup than the average user will trying to configure their desktop from a hacker setup.

        the average home user can use a stripped-down KDE set to emulate Windows or Mac if he/she wants to.

        This is a really good idea. I'd *love* to see a vanilla Linux standard that all programmers could program to without worrying about which of 97 flavors of Linux were installed on the PC. The CLI Commandos and UberL33ts could keep their CLIs and RTFM MAN pages while the general public benefited from having an inexpensive, realistic escape path from MS.
  • by Trigun (685027) <evil AT evilempire DOT ath DOT cx> on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:49AM (#8644033)
    Is make a processor that will run it!

    Where's my 3GHz Sparc?
  • Remember... (Score:4, Funny)

    by MarkMcLeod (759072) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:51AM (#8644045) Homepage
    When Zero Cool and his 'leet group of hackers infiltrated the Gibson. That's what this reminds me of, infinite ammounts of stupid. Except better. Sort of.
  • by InterruptDescriptorT (531083) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:53AM (#8644059) Homepage
    I think this is a very cool development. Don't get me wrong. But this is not what Linux needs right now.

    There is a huge push to make Linux a true desktop OS that non-tech-savvy people can use. I take the example of the typical Slashdot mom--she can probably open Outlook or IE and perform all of her e-mailing and Web surfing tasks just fine. Present her with KDE or Gnome, though, and it's scary and unfamiliar. And all of this fails to break Microsoft's strangehold on the desktop which is as much a product of Linux's unwillingness to adopt a unified GUI standard as it is Microsoft's anticompetitive practices.

    How about developers concentrate on two things--firstly, agreeing on a cohesive Linux desktop experience and forget about the Gnome/KDE fragmentation/flamewars that plague the Linux community, and secondly, writing the next generation of desktop apps for Linux, getting those perfected and at a level of usability and stability to rival Microsoft's offerings.

    It's not a 3D desktop that going to get Linux on desktops. It's going to be a solid, stable, easy-to-use standarized GUI experience with mature, full-featured apps that surpass the functionality that Microsoft's and other vendor's Win32 apps bring to the table.
    • by Noryungi (70322) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:11AM (#8644214) Homepage Journal
      Present her with KDE or Gnome, though, and it's scary and unfamiliar.

      Short answer: No.

      Long answer: Modern versions of KDE and Gnome are now so advanced that they are just as easy to use for a normal Mom to use.

      Example: A few months ago, I showed KDE 3.1.x, running on my Slackware laptop, to my wife (who is also a mom, by the way). She is not a power user, but she is smart and she knows Windows and Microsoft Office pretty well.

      Within 5 minutes, with only minimal explanations from me, she had opened KWrite, KMail and Konqueror and was happily checking her email and writing a small document, all the while surfing on the web.

      She even went as far as saying: "What's so special about Linux? It's almost the same as Windows!"... *sigh*

      So, please, let us stop this nonsense about Linux not being ready for the desktop, and not having quality apps. It's simply untrue. And more and more people, corporations and governments are realizing this and switching to Linux.

      This being said, I agree that a lot of average users would be very challenged by a Linux installation and configuration... But that's how people like me make money after all!

      It's not a 3D desktop that going to get Linux on desktops.

      Now, that , I can agree on. 3D desktop is a waste of time.
      • by dave420 (699308) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:01AM (#8644727)
        And when your wifey comes to update her software, or something breaks? That's where the real difference is. Getting an OS to be usable is one thing, but to get is user-resistant is another, which Linux hasn't addressed quite nearly enough. RPM anyone?
        • by mOdQuArK! (87332) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:17AM (#8644890)
          Did you ask her to install a program? How about install an external device? or even GIMP?

          Have you tried to do this with a super-non-techie under Windows (except for the GIMP thing, of course)? You get the same results, whether you're using Windows or not.

          Especially if your relatives are like mine & figure that if the installation program gives them the option to change the "destination directory" name, whatever that is, then they should use the same name for all of their "programs" so they'll be able to find it easier later on...

        • by SoTuA (683507) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:31AM (#8645048)
          This is bullshit. That's not a linux issue. That's a non-computer savvy person issue. My mom can't install anything on the computer, not when we had windows, not now after the switch to OsX.
    • by Rinikusu (28164) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:22AM (#8644300)
      The problem is, right now Linux on the Desktop is facing a monumental task in trying to take market/mindshare away from Windows. For the past how many years has Linux struggled to keep pace or achieve parity with 6 year old MS (or even Apple) offerings? LoTD is possible, but maybe its time for someone to look at the entire paradigm of computing and come up with something NEW. You know, innovation, that very thing most people accuse Linux of lacking. Here is an opportunity to Sun to create something that may (or may not) fail miserably, but at the same time, they are in a position to control it: To enforce interface guidelines, to achieve application compliance, etc, something also a problem between the GNOME/KDE/other WM camps. Linux will never succeed on the home desktop until someone does something to deal with the disparity and inherent "unfriendliness" of the various desktop environments. Maybe it's time to do a "BeOS", so to speak, and throw out the desktop as we know it and create something new.

      Then again, it might just crash and burn and burn and burn.
    • by DrWhizBang (5333) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:30AM (#8644365) Homepage Journal
      Although this may not be what linux needs right now, it certainly will be.

      All of the desktop stuff that you refer to is being worked on. I currently have a linux desktop at home, and my wife and kids use it with no problem. The linux desktop will soon be as good as the Windows or Mac desktop. ... then what do we do?

      Someone has to be working on The Next Big Thing (TM). Maybe it's not this, but we won't know unless someone works on proof of concept designs.

      Microsoft has said repeatedly that they believe that open source is not capable of innovation - only cloning. Well, that is certainly inaccurate, given apache, X, and the whole bloody internet. But it does set a bar higher, to make sure that linux can be more advanced than Windows, and to do that requires experimentation, and if a company like Sun is will ing to pay people to work on that, then so be it - even if their stuff is not open source, at least it is not Microsoft.
  • Video Drivers? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by WARM3CH (662028) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:53AM (#8644060)
    3D graphics on the accelerated cards without video drivers? Anyone? I mean, at least for the most interesting news would be to hear about opensource, fully functional video drivers for major cards. By itselt, 3D desktops are not original ideas, lots of people have good ideas about them but only if Sun or anyone else could push nVidia or ATI to provide what we really need (and miss) in Linux, then I'd be impressed.
      • by Lussarn (105276) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @10:00AM (#8644720)
        Yes, the nvidia drivers are good, but they are not open source. Today this doesn't matter too much because they give some "added value". They are not important for a fully functional desktop. If a 3D desktop would become the standard and 3D drivers are needed to run it at all Linux would need 3D drivers to be open source.

        For Linux success it's important to have a fully functional open source base to build upon.
  • This again!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dnoyeb (547705) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:54AM (#8644070) Homepage Journal
    I can't believe this. Sun has resorted to this old pipe dream!?!

    If Sun wants to know about 3d user interfaces, look in 3d games. They have 3d engines readily available but they still use 2d interfaces? KISS

    Put the resources towards someting that can actually do the company some good. I don't know what that is, but it couldn't be this.

    I wonder what Sun's shareholders are thinking right about now.
  • Here we go again (Score:5, Insightful)

    by martingunnarsson (590268) * <martin&snarl-up,com> on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:54AM (#8644071) Homepage
    I really think this interface looks great and runs smoothly, but I've heard the phrase "[...] change the way we interact with computers" way too many times by now. Apple's OS X is the most "modern" user interface I've used, and it's still just a bunch of windows and a pointer. How much can you change in the GUI without confusing Joe Sixpack too much?
  • by Jugalator (259273) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:56AM (#8644085) Journal
    As long as you can navigate faster and easier with it (after some adjustment period of course), I'm all for it!

    However, 3D desktops usually fall because of usability problems. Not really surprising, as most people (I know there are peculiar non-standard devices that deviate) are still using a 2D device (mouse) to visualize information on a 2D surface (monitor) to navigate in a 3D environment. Guess where the obstacle / incompatiblity with the I/O devices usually lies... :-P
  • by Adolph_Hitler (713286) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:57AM (#8644094)

    This is the kind of thing which has to be done, yet no one wanted to do it because it wasnt profitable.

    Linux needs a facelift if its to be successful on the Desktop. Let's thank Sun for wasting their money becase now Linux can take on and beat Longhorn.

    This is less of a waste of money than mono
  • by haggar (72771) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:57AM (#8644095) Homepage Journal
    I saw a demo of Looking Glass. It rocked. And yes, I do see potential uses for this technology, not least for some serious storage management. Or complex document management. Or large EDA tool integration. The possibilities are fascinating, and don't tell me you "don't see them".

    But, this demo was so long ago, by now I thought every nerd on earth knew about it. I am surprised Slashdot psoted it as news.
  • WindowBlinds (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pcraven (191172) <<paul> <at> <cravenfamily.com>> on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:57AM (#8644096) Homepage
    StarDock's [stardock.com] WindowBlinds and its related FX software can 'shrink' a window to the desktop. You are supposed to soon be able to hold a shift key and shrink the window while keeping the content interactive.

    Unfortunately I can't find a link describing that part of the software right now. It hasn't been put out as a full release yet.

    I find that more useful than turning a window on its side. But not useful enough I actually use it.
  • by shamir_k (222154) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:57AM (#8644097) Homepage
    The Java desktop system is really nothing but a branding strategy by Sun. Its basically a linux box with Java and Staroffice. The "Java" tag is an attempt to benefit from the hype around Java.

    But if Sun is going to use this as a platform to innovate, it could help Linux a lot. Sun has the marketing dollars to push the adoption of this platform, especially in emerging markets where Windows isn't entrenched already. We could see a whole new generation of users who are more familiar with Linux via JDS, than with Windows.

    • I actually talked with some of the Sun reps at LinuxWorld this year, and they said the reason the named it Java DS is because they did a market survey, and more people had heard of Java than Sun. Pretty sad huh?

      What i find remarkable is that in light of the fact that the desktop system has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with java, and the fact that the people in their customer base who would actually hear of such a product and really care all think naming a desktop system after a language is completely retarded, they go and name it Java DS anyways. They need to rethink their market.
  • dupe? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by manWorkSucks (745760) <don.c.smith@g m a il.com> on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:58AM (#8644109) Homepage
    why do i seem to remember reading this same story and watching that same video a few months ago?
  • by selderrr (523988) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:59AM (#8644113) Journal
    And additionally, there are a few windoze crappies of that kind : google [google.com]


    The example of flippin CD cases is the exact proof why this tech sucks : I'm moving away from pgysical cases towards a hierarchical, multi-layered view of my mp3s with iTunes.

    Sun, read my lips : I don't want to handle physical objects on a computer screen
    here's [google.com] another google for ya.


  • by Rogerborg (306625) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:59AM (#8644117) Homepage
    Please stop watching Minority Report. That was fiction. Fic-shun.
  • Sun seems to send out two different messages at the same time...

    On one hand: it is a conceptual software that is not intended for market ("experimental proof of concept", and the quote from Tom Murphy "I think in and of itself, it has a big wow effect. It's cute to see these things like 3D animations of stuff moving around and think of collaborative space, but how does it make my business more productive?")

    On the other hand: it seems that Sun is quite serious about Looking Glass ("rapidly working to formalize the implementation", "Sun has made it clear they want Looking Glass to be a part of the open source community and to get open source community buy-in on the project").

    I think that Sun has not made up their own minds yet - it will be quite interesting to see what Sun is going to do next, how the open source community will respond, and most importantly what does Sun really want out of Looking Glass? In the long run, more market shares, yes, but how?
  • Lame idea. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by macpell (726325) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:06AM (#8644176)
    The reason I keep all of my music on my computer is because it's NOT like flipping through my CD collection.
  • by mccalli (323026) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:10AM (#8644206) Homepage
    Rubbish, the lot of it. Point by point:

    • increases the transparency of a window so that you can see through it
      Marvellous. Just as users of current operating systems have ben doing for years anyway.
    • turns a window on its side so that it sits at the edge of a screen like a book on a book shelf
      Hmm. Potentially interesting as a way to pick between open windows, but doesn't Expose perform this task in a better manner?
    • turns a window completely around and leaves a note on the back
      Ah, how terribly useful. Hidden, non-obvious information in a GUI. Superb.
    • and takes a database of CDs presented as physical CDs, that you flip through, reading the labels, just as you would with real CDs, until you locate the one you want.
      Except that in the real world I can never find the bloody CDs, because I can't remember where I've put them. I can navigate a media player interface far faster than I can hunt for CDs, and I can use more search criteria too (album, artist etc.)
    Nope - stunningly unimpressed. A computer GUI is an abstraction of the real world, not the real world itself. Applying the same clutter you find in the real world would make the interface worse, not better.

    Cheers,
    Ian

    • Agreed, unless they come up with a way to increase productivity, which this doesn't seem todo, why are they wasting time on it?

      Let's see, 3d graphics of CD's or a simple text field where I type in 'Bandname' and hit enter.

      Add to that the fact that 3d seems best navigated with a mouse and suddenly you realize that you're moving away from a keyboard interface which works better than a pointing device.

    • Re:Hey! Asses! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Pratfall (626113) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:55AM (#8644082)
      "A 3D window manager is a dumb idea. Stop wasting money on it!"

      How is trying to replicate the natural interface that we use every day a dumb idea? Do you stick every piece of paper that is on your desk to your face? I think it's much more natural to reach for something you want than to maximise/minimize it.
    • Sun's Java desktop comes with Realplayer installed. So its not a problem for customers of Java Destkop, who are most likley to use it. For everyone else there is Mplayer [mplayerhq.hu], the universial media player!
        • BoingBoing mentions a way to get a spyware-free RealPlayer through the BBC:
          How to get spyware-free RealPlayer through the BBC An anonymous reader sez, "The BBC made a unique deal with Real Networks which disposes of their spyware tactics. Basically, if a user clicks on a link to download Real Player from a BBC website, the referrer script sends them to a page where they can download an expiry-free, spyware-free and nuicance-free version of the player. It's because the BBC have such a stringent public service remit, that it was offensive to charge people a license fee for BBC content, then make them pay all over again for the facility to view/listen to it."
          Link [bbc.co.uk] (Thanks, Anonymous Reader!)
    • by squaretorus (459130) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @08:57AM (#8644099) Homepage Journal
      Linux does not need some fancy graphics on the desktop to make an impact.


      It does need them to make some very specific 'impacts' however. Take your average user - give them something that works, is pretty, and is genuinely useful and they will jump for joy.

      Even simple things like plugging a digital camera into my laptop (XP) and having it come up with the 'would you like to save these?' option - Yes - Then pick a slideshow from Explorer - it all worked so smoothly and quickly that my better half almoost pooped her pants with 'computers are getting good' excitement.

      XP looks shit - but its easy to understand shit with landscape wallpaper and nice fonts. Linux looks shit and its kinda scary shit with penguins or nekkid chicks for wallpaper and white fonts on black... scary!
    • by DrWhizBang (5333) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:07AM (#8644186) Homepage Journal
      Sun has no history of doing _anything_ at all interesting in terms of UI work.

      Actually, Sun invested heavily in usability studies that have been used by the Gnomers in developing their HIG and Sun usablility testing directly influence the Gnome 2 release.

      Not that disagree with the usability concerns of trying to mirror the real world in computer space, but hopefully we have seen enough bad examples (MS Bob, IBM apps from late nineties) that we can use this kind of technology properly.
    • by Gr8Apes (679165) on Tuesday March 23 2004, @09:24AM (#8644312)
      Linux does not need some fancy graphics on the desktop to make an impact.

      I would disagree. Fancy graphics, eye candy, etc, appeals to the masses. The masses spend massive amounts of money on additional software. Massive amounts of money tends to attract the kind of attention Linux needs to make a lasting impact. (Note: it's already made a real impact:)

      So, even if this is utter crap for you and me and we might never use it, having it as an option would be good for Linux. After all, look at the functionally crappy but pretty Windows UI, and how many people "like" it. Then listen to new Mac panther users. They LOVE their new OS - "everything's so easy" is what I hear from the converted. Matter of fact, I'd say that OSX has done more to promote Unix to the common person's desktop than anyone.

    • If this 3D desktop works, then it could very well be the definative "killer app" for linux.

      And what exactly would you do with this 3d desktop? In terms of productivity? Does reordering translucent windows on your virtual bookshelf all day long count as productivity?
      I think not.

      In your post you mention Visicalc for apple and Lotus for Dos, and I agree they did drive these oses, but this is just another window manager , and has nothing to do with an application.

      Now, if this environment exposed an API th