XPde 0.5 - A Linux Desktop for Windows Users 460
Nissan Dookeran writes "From the website: 'The XPde Team today announced the immediate availability of XPde 0.5.0, a complete rewrite of the XPde desktop environment...XPde aims to recreate the Windows XP desktop environment on Linux in order to allow Windows users to "feel at home" in front of a Linux computer' Full announcement of release here with screenshots here. Might be a good transitional tool for Windows users looking not wanting to give up their eye-candy interface initially. The main page also has a good PDF document regarding legal issues when developing software that emulates Windows functions. A StarOffice version of the document also available."
secure winXP (Score:4, Funny)
that's nice but (Score:3, Funny)
Cool (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Cool (Score:5, Funny)
Think of it as digital methadone, propping up the poor user as they are slowly weaned off being given their daily hit of M$.
Phillip.
Re:Cool (Score:5, Funny)
Pop quiz:
If you drag a floppy disk into the trash can, does it:
A) Delete everything on the disk
B) Destroy the disk
C) Eject the disk
Re:Cool (Score:2, Funny)
Of course that's the proper response for just about anything you do under Windows. :-P
I'm only kidding! It was A, right?
Re:Cool (Score:2)
Morphix LiveCD of XPde (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Morphix LiveCD of XPde (Score:3)
Try it with phlak desktop=sneaky at boot time IIRC.
Re:Morphix LiveCD of XPde (Score:3)
Quite a good work but.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Something seems wrong here (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:5, Insightful)
some of the icons are so similar that it looks like they've changed maybe one or two pixels at most.
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:2)
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue with Lindows is the similarity to a trademarked name (though I agree that trademarking a common word is insane).
If Microsoft can convince a judge that it owns the letters 'X' and 'P' (as opposed to the trademark 'Windows XP'), then the project will have something to worry about.
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:2)
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:3, Insightful)
The concluding sentence of the legal paper by the XPde advisor is this: "Trade mark and trade dress are areas of potentially serious legal risk for XPde and similar projects but is beyond the scope of this analysis."
IANAL, but trust me when I say that trademark and trade dress are...complicated. I strongly suspect that the reason the analysis of these issues is not public is because the case is much weaker here, and they don't want to help Microsoft in a potential lawsuit.
In the short term, it's not clea
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:3, Funny)
Fuck, even Slashdot can take down whatever the hell this is - the server's toasted already.
Re:I'm not convinced by that PDF (Score:4, Informative)
Great Idea ... But ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't mean to piss in anyone's Corn Flakes, but damn
Re:Great Idea ... But ... (Score:2)
Re:Great Idea ... But ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, and they lost. So, if Microsft copied Apple (and don't forget Apple copied Xerox), what is wrong if somebody copies Microsoft?
The only thing Apple gained from the expensive lawsuit with Microsoft is a copyright on the trashcan. So that is the reason you see a different icon for "trash" on all of the different operating systems there are.
The only caveat is that the Apple vs. Microsoft was fought in the era without software patents. If it had been (like today), Apple most likely would have won.
Microsoft does have a lot of money that they can cause a lot of pain for someone they don't like. They also have software patents on many things that people would not think of getting a patent for.
But if Microsoft were to put the squeeze on somebody for making a windows look-a-like, there might be attorneys that would take the case on antitrust grounds.
legal issue? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:legal issue? (Score:2)
Re:legal issue? (Score:3, Insightful)
It seems more and more people try to think of Linux as a corporation, as an entity. You can't sue Linux. You can sue Linux companies, but our friends in Utah show how well that works. The most that will happen is XPde will be C&D'd to stop distributing. But what do they care? They're not making money from it. They will comply, and another lookalike will be squashed, proving the need for a coherent, non-imitating *nix desktop. Remember
Re:legal issue? (Score:5, Insightful)
That having been said, WindowMaker's a fine window manager, but it doesn't appeal to the sort of user this thing addresses. (Though I wonder if it's this sort of user, someone looking for a better Windows rather than a free Unix, that is good for the Linux community.)
My experience (Score:4, Interesting)
Eye Candy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Migration? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think that one of the areas that linux can really beat windows given enough effort is with it's desktop environments.
Given this, wouldn't it be better for people migrating from windows to become acustomed to the more powerful desktop environment of linux, rather than one which sacrifices some good features for the sake of making windows users feel more at home?
Also, if you shroud the differences between windows and linux behind a look-alike gui as soon as something goes wrong, or the user trys to install something the os will likely throw up a very un-windows like error, which will most likely confuse the user, leaving a sour taste about linux in their mouth.
You may claim my $0.02 via Paypal or Direct Credit
Hang on a second... Initially? (Score:4, Insightful)
Man, the more I watch the Linux world from the outside, the less i'm beginning to believe in "the revolution". It would be funny if it wasn't crushingly dissapointing - Two sides that "just don't get it".
*Sigh*
Re:Hang on a second... Initially? (Score:2)
there's lots of useless eycandy for nix, as there is for windows as well.
(just helped install litestep + a theme of their choosing to both the guys I share the kitchen with, as they had gotten fed up with the standard win xp look)
Re:Hang on a second... Initially? (Score:5, Insightful)
non x86? (Score:3, Informative)
So can I run this completely rewritten version on our Sun boxes?
Mirrors (Score:3, Informative)
xpde.qadram.com
xpde.holobit.net
xpde.tech-critic.com
xpde.abenks.com
xpde.debian.co.nz
toxic-systems.de/xpde
xpde.linuxring.hu
xpde.gaesi.org
xpde.jt-webservice.de
Good...bad...no - good! (Score:5, Insightful)
I do have concerns about the legal side of the project, but other posters has already made good comments about that.
Re:Good...bad...no - good! (Score:2, Troll)
I think you'll probably find that most people really don't want to be thought of as geeks. Sure, we've taken on the label with a kind of pride, but we're not most people.
That said, I agree with you about the GUI. One of the reasons I stopped using Linux (after having used it in some capacity for about 4 years) is that, to my eyes, XP is just prettier. Also, I was doing stuff (.n
Re:Good...bad...no - good! (Score:4, Informative)
That said, I agree with you about the GUI. One of the reasons I stopped using Linux (after having used it in some capacity for about 4 years) is that, to my eyes, XP is just prettier.
Seriously though if you have been using linux for around 4 years you must have seen many many cases where Linux can look soooo much nicer than XP's fisherprice look and feel, sheesh!
I've got mine set up to look like OSX Panther
here [blackapology.com] is a screenshot! how subjective is that ? And personally if I had to stare at those garish XP colors all day i'd imagine my eyes would hurt pretty bad.
Re:Good...bad...no - good! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Good...bad...no - good! (Score:2)
Nothing bad about OS X thoug h ;-)
Re:Good...bad...no - good! (Score:2)
I always wondered why we try so hard to be like something that everyone is switching from. I mean If they don't like the old product, why spend all the resources duplicating it.
Give them something easy, refreshing, new, cool, exciting. You don't do that by copying everything from someone else then wonder why they call you up with "IE wont load".
I like gnome and thi
It's the wrong product (Score:5, Interesting)
95% of the angst most people feel from using Windows comes from one single thing: security. I find it remarkably easy to switch people to a distro like Xandros by telling them: it is safe and will protect your photos and documents from viruses, trojans, and worms.
All that is needed is a reasonable level of compatibility so that people can continue to make their documents & spreadsheets, download their photos from their digital cameras, and email their friends.
Not a single person ever says: "but it looks nothing like Windows!" - the only counter objection is that "certain things do not work".
Emulating XP safely may be an intellectual challenge but it is not part of the Linux sales argument. Distributions like Xandros - which install easily, and handle smoothly - are.
Re:It's the wrong product (Score:2)
I know quite a lot of users that I would like to convince switching to linux, but I won't bother because I know they will give up frustrated becaus ethey don't feel at home a
Re:It's the wrong product-Darwin would be proud. (Score:2)
Re:It's the wrong product (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's the wrong product (Score:4, Interesting)
Power users can suffer from a similar problem. They might know their OS and apps well enough to operate them blindfolded, and have tweaked them to ultimate efficency. So if the menus are different, or the keyboard shortcuts changed (or worse, not available), then the OS "doesn't work". When I (a DOS/Win user) was required to get familiar with Mac System 6 many years ago, the inability to access pulldown menus with the keyboard led me to dismiss it as deficient. When I started experimenting with Linux, I muttered some very unkind words when I couldn't find anything comparable to AUTOEXEC.BAT (DOS), the Startup submenu (Windows), or Startup Items folder (Mac) folders (just an arcane init system in /etc/rc.d/). When OS X came along (finally fixing the "broken" pulldown menus) I was frustrated that none of the new window-control buttons equated to Maximize. Now, I've mostly gotten past this stuff, by simply accepting that the different OSes I use behave differently, and that I have to give up some reflex-based efficency for versatility. But the obstacle to acceptance was still there; I just got over it.
It is back to useability again (Score:2)
I have not had that particular cups problem, but quite a few linux UIs are really pretty arcane. Then again, I was trying to configure XP's networking for a friend last week and did not manage to get communication with the client going.
He then tried reconfiguring his client himself and ended up being locked out of his system altogether. Neither XP nor linux has a monopoly on problems.
This eye candy is not what will make linux popular (Score:3, Informative)
GNU/Linux is diffrent then windows! I hope it will always remain so, but when talking about user friendlyness the problem isn't with switching windows or what your icons look like, it is more about setting up programs.
In the GNU/Linux world people still open a text console on a every day basis, Somw of us find it the more convinient way of managing the system.
I have several times tried using some automatic configuration tool(usually by Mandrake) and quickly found myself opening emacs in a split window with a man page and a config file.
In many cases the problem is with the GNU/Linux gurus not being able to help with GUI tools. On several ocasions my brother came to me with linux questions how do I do this or that and I knew my way of doing it(Typing in a console window) but I knew very little of which GUI tool will do the job and how.
These are the major issues in GNU/Linux UI
Me
Re:This eye candy is not what will make linux popu (Score:2)
Re:This eye candy is not what will make linux popu (Score:2)
Of course GNU/Linux is different than Windows. It contains no graphics and no desktop: just a console to enter commands and a few basic programs/utilities.
I can happily inform you that KDE 3.2.1 runs just fine on Op
Wohoo! choice! (Score:4, Insightful)
As long as there is choice, there will be no breakthrough. One more choice won't help either.
Sure, starting in various ends will perhaps give a Darwinian process of development, but now with a plethora of applications developed on the different desktops, incompatible with eachother, there will be no survival of the fittest. All the desktop technologies seem doomed to live side by side forever. sigh.
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:2, Insightful)
When I started using Mandrake, I thought the clean polish of the Keramic and Galaxy themes were just fantastic. I played around with all the different themes and widgits I could find, but as time went on, I just wanted that good ol' Redmond look'n'feel. Sad to say it, but my Linux box looks and acts pretty much like a Windows 98 machine.
If someone were to come along and make me use a "different" desktop because that's what everyone else has decided we
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a cute idea, but like another response to your post I also don't see it as realistic and in some places I completely disagree with what you've said. Someone else might elaborate since I'm not an expert on kernel development, but I also think you've missed some important points about how things work.
Linux can have a dictatorship and "one way of doing everything" at the kernel level, because by definition the kernel is linux. If someone were to fork the kernel and do things differently, it wouldn't be linux any more. Similarly, if someone forks emacs it becomes something else. If someone forks X11, it becomes something else. And so on.
Nobody's seriously and successfully forked the linux kernel for one reason or another ... or at least if they have, it's not called linux anymore. But there are several other kernels in existence that are available and work significantly differently. Even if nobody bothers to fork the linux kernel, some people may go and work on the BSD kernels, for instance, because they prefer the design.
In essence, as long as enough people disagree about the best way to do something, there will be a fork. It happens with nearly every application available as much as, if not more than, it happens with kernels.
Desktops are a huge area of disagreement. The design of them is mostly about usability, and we're still in infancy when it comes to understanding the best ways to do things. ACM has only been running HCI conferences since the early 1980's, and since then researchers have figured out that designing good desktops is very difficult. Putting rules on it might make it slightly easier to be compatible with or learn, but placing draconian enforcement on a policy that isn't known to be good is more likely just to leave us with another crappy desktop.
Windows is a crappy desktop from a usability perspective. Personally I prefer to avoid KDE and Gnome, both of which seem to want to mimic Windows in most ways, including most of it's bad features. For a linux desktop I prefer WindowMaker, which also isn't perfect, but is has several features that I just like. Having the option to switch and still have all of my X applications work is fantastic.
Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
The top parent post is yet another example of critics proposing the wrong solution to a problem.
What we need is interoperability and compatibility. Don't try to make a dictatorship, encourage effords like Freedesktop.org [freedesktop.org] instead.
Luckily interoperability is improving more and more. I don't know about KDE but both GNOME 2.6 and ROX have adopted the Freedesktop.org MIME standard. All desktops have already adopted the Xdnd standard quite a while ago. KDE 3.0+ has adopted the clipboard standard. GNOME 2, and I believe KDE 3.2 too, have adopted the menu vFolder standard. This list goes on and on.
What people really want is to be able to write software that can integrate in every desktop. They want to write for one standard and work anywhere.
That's exactly why we need interoperability and compatibility, not a single implementation.
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:4, Insightful)
Now we have this wonderful prospect that Miguel de Icaza has declared all existing toolkits obsolete and is presumably going to develop a new one from scratch and start a religious war in the Gnome/GTK camp when he decides he wants to switch existing apps over with all the devastating consequences. The one plus here is KDE will just ignore him and maybe he will sufficiently screw up GNOME for a year or two so that GNOME will fall behind and fail and then we can unify on one desktop.
Just do what I do and try to run OpenOffice and Evolution on a KDE desktop. It puts a massive suck on memory because there are three sets of software doing all the same things but differently. You have to shift gears everytime you move between them because everything about the UI's in each is different. I have utter contempt for people who complain they don't like the "look" of KDE and GNOME. The "look" is insignificant compared to consistency.
I don't even consider using Mozilla because then I would hate the massive inconsistency so badly I would just give up on a Linux desktop. Konqueror has its quirks but its really important that its small, light, fast and fits with the rest of the desktop. I'll drop Evolution and return to kmail as soon as the HTML editor in kmail works. I need to start evaluating koffice to see if I can get off OpenOffice or I need to buy a whole bunch more RAM. The time it takes OpenOffice to load is reason enough to want to get rid of it. KDE is using some major tricks to get apps to load quickly and to circumvent the major overheads in dynamic linking. When you load OpenOffice you benefit from none of this so you wait an hour for it to load.
Let me spell it out for you. Mac OSX and Windows have a consistent look and feel, all the applications behave consistently. This is especially true of OSX. Thats why ordinary people like it so much. If you use one app you can switch to another and use it with equal ease. This consistency is a hundred times more important to users than all the "innovation" you see in Linux applications. If you want Linux to win on the desktop the application suite HAS to be consistent, and I mean really consistent, as in how menus are laid out, how accelerators are defined, how tools work, how things look etc.
If you want Linux to continue to fail on the desktop just stay the course. You might win some enterprise support because big companies want free. You don't have a prayer with most average users with the current state of things.
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:3, Interesting)
We don't need one desktop to replace them all. We need different desktops to be interoperable.
Nobody in Windows land complains that there's more than one widget set (MFC vs VCL vs Qt vs pure Win32 API vs resource controls vs
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:5, Interesting)
Having programmed in the Windows environment, I know there are multiple competing widget sets there too, so I know your argument is fundamentally wrong.
But even assuming you're right. Assuming that Linux will never "breakthrough" without a single unified widget set. A single desktop. My question is... so what?
Does it matter? Who cares if Linux never gets bigger than this? It rocks pretty mightily right now. I'm really happy with it. I got started with Linux so I could get UNIX@home. Ok, admittedly I already had UNIX@home (Interactive) but Linux was simply better. So I was happy back in 1992.
Everything since then has been gravy. If you had told me in 1997 that I'd be playing 3D games and using state-of-the-art word processors on Linux, I'd have laughed at you and gone back to nethack and LaTeX. But now I'm sitting in front of a GNOME 2.6 desktop typing into a modern web browser. I'm in utter disbelief that it's this good. I would have been happy with command line UNIX! This is way more than I ever expected.
So does it matter if Linux doesn't take over 100% of the market? I say it doesn't matter. I think it will happen anyway, but I won't cry if it doesn't. Linux rocks already. I'm content. Aren't you?
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is the best set of widgets, the best way of doing anything, the best GUI interface? The last one you might get most people to agree on, the first two are impossible.
Depending on intelligence, skill, experience, work organzation, ability to multitask,
Choice is critical (Score:2, Insightful)
>breakthrough. One more choice won't help either.
Are you insane? Almost the *entire* reason why Windows is as much a security nightmare as it is, is because of it's homogenous nature. Sure, maybe it makes life a lot easier for end users, but have you ever stopped to think how much easier it makes life for virus writers and crackers as well?
Having only one system has it's pros and cons, the same way having choice does...but from where I'm sitting, choi
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:4, Insightful)
"What desktop linux needs is ONE desktop to replace them all. That is; one set of widgets, one way of doing everything, and one interface for developing gui apps for linux."
Why does Linux need this one singular desktop? Who is going to benefit from lack of choice? Do you really expect developers to give up their choice in what to develop with, just because you think it will help more people adopt Linux. Where on kernel.org do you see that goal of "Get everyone off of windows and onto a Linux Desktop"? Where on KDE's site do you see the goal of "Being the ONE TRUE Linux desktop." I like having a choice in my desktop, and I like having a choice in my development tools.
"This kind of dictatorship works dandy at the core level of linux, and needs to be extended to include the GUI, or the "linux desktop" will remain a flamewar of competing technologies, each trying to copy what the "top-down" managed software is doing."
First off, this isn't the kind of dictatorship that is used in kernel development, the "top-down" management you speak of doesn't exist. Linus doesn't decide by himself the roadmap for the kernel, he doesn't dictate what the developers should use, or how they should code, he just makes sure that anything put in the kernel is quality.
"As long as there is choice, there will be no breakthrough. One more choice won't help either."
That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. As long as there is a choice, there will be no breakthrough? Perhaps we should all ditch Linux, OS X, BeOS, BSD or whatever else for Windows, because having a choice is apparently bad for innovation, and as long as we choose to fight over what OS to use, there wil be no breakthroughs.
" but now with a plethora of applications developed on the different desktops, incompatible with eachother, there will be no survival of the fittest. "
Where the hell is all this incompatability you speak of? Right now I'm running fluxbox with several KDE and Gnome apps open. They don't tell me "Fuck you, I'm not gonna work if you have those other guys' libraries installed!". And please explain how having less choice would contribute to survival of the fittest? If there's only one desktop, with no competition, what pushes it to be the fittest?
"All the desktop technologies seem doomed to live side by side forever. sigh."
That's funny, because they've all grown and improved drastically over they years, despite the thousands of people like you telling them they are going about it wrong. Gnome just released another version, with tons of improvements, but I guess they might as well not have, since their software is doomed to stagnate.
Serious people. stop whining about what Linux needs. Everyone's needs are different, and the fact that it gives us a choice is where the real power of OSS lies, and it's what truly gives us what we need. If your goal is to get Linux on every desktop, great, go for it, but don't try to bend the world to your whim at the cost of taking away my choice, or else we all might as well have statyed with MS.
Choice is good. Period. Dumbing things down on a development level is a horrible idea, dumbing them down on a distro level is smarter.
Problem (Score:2)
What you people don't seem to realize is that Linux is not about "beating Microsoft". It's not about "marketshare". The majority of Linux developer don't give a flying rats ass about that.
When you start developing an Open Source program, 99.999999% of the time it is because you're scratching an itch. That basically means, you're writing it for fun.
And most everyone
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you don't get it. This is not a question of choices; it's a question of education. I'm administrator of a lan at my cegep called(clubinfo). we have some good machines on XP and had some old crashin ones on W98. When I arrive I replaced all the w98 ones by some xpde ones. And even if XPDE is not complete it's no problem.
The thing is: students can use any machines without knowing the difference. The menus, progs and windows are the sam
Re:So what do you want? (Score:4, Insightful)
We don't need one implementation, we need implementations to be compatible and interoperable! Instead of trying to make a dictatorship, go support effords like Freedesktop.org [freedesktop.org].
GTK has C++ bindings and QT has C bindings, so it doesn't matter what language you use.
"The linux people need to understand that ONE half-assed product is better than the choice between TWO superb products."
What?! Being forced to use one car that breaks down every week is better than being able to choose between two cars that don't break down for years?
Being forced to use DOS as a server OS is better than being able to choose between Linux and Solaris?
You are heavily underestimating peoples' intelligence and their ability to choose.
Again, we need interoperability and compatibility, not a dictatorship.
Re:So what do you want? (Score:3)
They don't have to. Buy a Linux PC at Walmart and everything will work out-of-the-box. The user don't have to choose *anything* at all.
Or, if you're installing Linux yourself, click "Default install" and let the distributor take care of all the choices for you.
Not having to choose is also a choice.
Re:So what do you want? (Score:2)
That's the whole problem. Nothing ever goes away. This is the first time this has become a problem for the OSS development model, but a serious problem it is.
Is it?
I want a desktop OS where I can be sure that any application I develop will run on any desktop and look exactly the same on all of them, regardless of what language I develop it in.
If you develop in GTK+, it will look like GTK+ in every desktop; If you develop in QT, it will look like QT in every desktop; et-cetera. It doesn't matt
Re:Wohoo! choice! (Score:2)
So, when is that going to happen?
I agree with the original poster, there needs to be a single desktop. We could wait forever before deciding what the 'ultimate desktop' is. Surelly, if the KDE and Gnome (and other) developers got together they could build a good desktop to put Windows to shame a lo
I like it (Score:3, Insightful)
i know microsoft is the devil and all that, but i've grown accustomed to the XP interface at work. i use SuSE linux at home, and i like it. however, at work i use xp and find its interface better in many ways.
if only we could integrate all the hardware settings into the main gui like xp does for display settings and such, then linux would really take off with a window manager like this.
there's also a lot to say for copying OS X, or developing our own little gui interface altogether, but that's another post...
Re:I like it (Score:5, Insightful)
there are not only americans reading slashdot!
greetings from sweden (1:30pm),
nico
Uh-oh! (Score:3, Funny)
Mirror of the screenshot (Score:4, Informative)
Screenshot [phnet.fi]
A shot of the 0.5.0 release, the rest of shots are from the previous release.
Re:mods on crack? (Score:3, Funny)
Just to prove I'm not on crack, I'm posting this to undo the moderation.
Come on people, be realistic (Score:2)
Just because something's utterly legal doesn't mean a megacorp isn't going to sue you into the stone age for potentially hurting their bottom line.
Joe Sixpack has to re-learn a GUI anyway. (Score:5, Insightful)
Fast flash: Microsoft breaks all of their UI conventions with every major rev. Everything from the start menu to common control panels to file managers are all wildly different from one rev to the next. A slavish adherence to Microsoft standards will only put you behind when they move on to the next mediocre interface, wasting a lot of effort that could be geared towards making a better, friendlier, easier-to-grok-than-Microsoft interface that "Joe User" will take to like a fish to water. Kinda like, you know, how Apple does with the Macintosh? And no, this does not mean to mimic the MOSX interface. Get creative and think everything through to the logical end, and you'll be all right. See the earlier article on ROX.
Aping Microsoft won't steal users, it will just confuse them when stuff breaks because it doesn't precisely match up with the way its Microsoft analogue works.
SoupIsGood Food
Re:Joe Sixpack has to re-learn a GUI anyway. (Score:3)
Fast flash: You're wrong.
The taskbar still does what it has always done, it's still at the bottom of the screen, the start button is still in the lower left corner, the start menu still contains links to the control panel, shut down, and printers...
Of course they have changed some of the interface! They'
Registry? (Score:2)
This fake-linux-registry is going to confuse people while enabling them to bugger up their system without having a clue what happened.
Just a quick note from a "windows user" (Score:5, Interesting)
I tried redhat 5.2 when it was current, got it installed as a dual boot, got X configured manually, got on the internet with it. Couldn't do anything else, thought it was a neat thing but not of much use, and removed it.
Tried redhat 7.2, and while the install was SO much easier, I simply didn't have the patience and time to learn how to recompile the Kernel, compile my apps, and become a command line wizard just to get anything done. (I knew a bit about the command line, I had used sun boxes at work for CAD)
Flash forward to this year, I seriously wanted to get linux to work, I want to have a fast, streamlined system with lots of good, free software. I installed Mandrake 9.2, and I *am* seriously impressed with this thing. I got so much of it working, the way it handles the rpm's is great, the desktop is great, the install was great, but why am I still using windows?
I can't figure out how to maneuver around X to update my video drivers and I can't get Firewire working. My goal is to have a killer video editing machine, and I gots to have firewire. The hoops I jumped through to get the video capture software working was dependency hell, and in the end I couldnt get the 1394 subsystem working.
Again, I don't have the time, I can install windows and have it all in just a couple hours. Maybe later... I promise, I will try again. I AM a power user. I AM competent enough. I HAVE programmed. I just don't have the patience and time to have to make things work that take a SINGLE CLICK and work OUT OF THE BOX in windows. Here's my point: Either give me to a single, difinitive guide that explains these problems or make it as easy as windows. I WANT To use linux, and I'm not alone. Help us.
Re:Just a quick note from a "windows user" (Score:2)
BTW it is also the best platform for video editing. If that is what you want, buy one. If you are unsure, at least get a demo from somewhere before you start spending money on PC hardware.
Re:Just a quick note from a "windows user" (Score:5, Insightful)
I feel for you, I really do. And I think one of the previous posters is right - as Linux developers some of us spend so much time at the command line that we don't know how "normal" users expect to be able to do things. I've done a few installfests, and personally I feel embarrassed when I have to go to the command line in order to change or fix something, particularly when it's a feature that should be available from the GUI (or is but doesn't work). End users just don't "get" the command line like we do - they don't understand the power, and mostly they neither want nor need it. Like it or not, this isn't going to change.
What we need to do is start listening to the users. Believe it or not, some of their complaints are actually genuine. Of course, sometimes we also need to educate them in the new ways that Linux offers of doing things. There needs to be a balance between these two, and this is not a balance that is always struck in the Linux community.
Linux usability needs work. I never realised how much until I started to think about how much time I spend just getting things to work in Linux. The other day I needed to scan and print a few photographs. I had had it working properly before, but when I tried it this time, neither XSANE nor Kooka (which I believe relies on SANE anyway) would play ball. In the end I realised I didn't have enough time to screw around figuring out why the scanner didn't work, let alone the printer which I had previously set up fine in Windows. I rebooted into Win2K and did the work in a snap. Me! A dyed in the wool Linux person, full-time home Linux desktop user and Linux developer, who nearly lives Linux, had to reboot to Windows because he couldn't be bothered to set something up. I am truly ashamed.
Personally I don't believe XPde is really going to solve anything. Sure, it might attract a few more users, but to get lots more and get them to stay I believe we have to improve in the following three areas:
1) Help people, and don't try to push them into something that they're not comfortable with. Don't get them to try installing Gentoo if they'd be better off with something like Mandrake (as examples). Learn how to use the GUI tools yourself instead of the command line, so you can show users the right way. Show them the good things in Linux. DO NOT MENTION how crappy you think Windows is. Listen when they complain about something - try to work out the message they've got, and if it's worth considering, see if you can pass it on to the right people (eg. if it's KDE, file a proper bug report at bugs.kde.org).
2) Stop the infighting. There's no need for it, and it only hurts. If you're an XYZ user, don't go to the ABC forums (or comment on an article that's solely about ABC) blathering on about how much better XYZ is, or even worse, how crappy you think ABC is.
3) For developers, follow up on #1. As creators of end-user software, we need to seek out these things that are hard and make them easy. I'm not saying nobody's doing this - you only have to look at the latest releases of both GNOME and KDE to see that people really are taking notice. We just need more people, and we need them focussing on solving the right problems.
For my part, when I have gotten a little further ahead on my project I hope to be able to have time to contribute more to desktop Linux projects. For now, I try to write clear, concise and non-duplicate bug reports if I find a problem, help new Linux users where I can, and make a few donations here and there.
Re:Just a quick note from a "windows user" (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Don't you thi
Re:Just a quick note from a "windows user" (Score:3, Informative)
Why? (Score:2)
Eyecandy? Enlightnment! (Score:3, Interesting)
Nice idea .... but (Score:2, Interesting)
1) It doesn't need to be exactly analogous in order for someone to know what is going on. Windows users appears to handle the change from classic interface to XP interface without suddenly dying!
2) I can see that they have recreated some of Windows' worst aspects as well in the name of familiarity. I saw the old 16-colour drop down box in one of the screenshots, surely a relic fro
Clone COMMAND.COM (Score:2, Funny)
Now someone should write a clone of COMMAND.COM for Linux, for as we all know it's The Superior Command Interpreter(tm).
Big missing failure mode here (Score:3, Interesting)
She'll either call her service technician (you), or take it to CompUSA, where the tech will blow a gasket trying to figure out why his windows based diagnostic tools don't work.
I'm not saying there aren't linux equivalent apps for most windows XP things, but there isn't a 1 to 1 correlation, and the Devil is in the Details.
Case in point: I got my mom an iOpener one year. It worked well, it did what she needed, but she always felt there was stuff she couldn't do because the device couldn't accomodate 100% of the things her church buddies could do. (Quicktime? Windows Media? Get infected with Gator?)
Granted, that's not all bad - especially the inherent security features, but it IS an issue that will arise.
Missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
The day you put the driver or software CD into your machine, click "install" and it Just Works(tm) - your new printer appears with an icon along with the rest, your software appears in the menu, the control panel lets you configure your new graphics card - is the day ordinary folk will switch to Linux.
The project has set out what it intended to achieve - a Windows XP look-alike. So well done on that front. But I think the authors are wrong if they think the look of the GUI is what's stopping people adopting GNU/Linux for the desktop.
i think it's a bad idea (Score:2, Insightful)
Think Different... (Score:2, Interesting)
major missing features (Score:3, Insightful)
- a complete file browser (file dialogs are lacking)
- an integrated browser (using khtml wouldn't have hurt too much, would it guys?)
- a MIME editor
- no Quicklaunch bar
The only really noticeable change is that it's a bit faster - and still pretty doggish, I might add. I don't personally notice any UI changes since when it was first anounced on slashdot some (6+?) months ago. Seems either their code is pretty bloaty, or their development suite is crap (Kylix).
This is certainly a project I'd like to see succeed, as it would make a very good drop-in replacement for a basic Windows desktop for the average user - to the point where they might not even notice the change, if they're already using things like OO.o and Mozilla.
I personally think that the file manager shouldn't "bother" to impliment things such as Unix permissions, but to abstract them to "Windows standards", if you will (maybe with an option for Unix permissions?).
I'd say it's VERY VERY important to impliment the Quicklaunch bar and make it so that the taskbar's position is "customizeable" as it is in Windows. Aside from the complete computer retard, it seems nearly everyone has their own "custom" taskbar setup (auto-minimize, double-deep taskbar w/ quicklaunch on top, quicklaunch on bottom, on the left side, on the right, no quicklaunch, multiple quicklaunch, quicklaunch to the right, to the left, etc.)
I'm not sure eye candy is the issue... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not sure that's the salient issue. Windows user who are savvy to Linux know about the great eye candy that is available for Linux. Frankly, if it came down to eye candy, projects like Enlightenment offer no advantage over ObjectDesktop [stardock.com], WindowsBlinds [stardock.com], and StyleXP [tgtsoft.com]. And so far, Microsoft's ClearType [microsoft.com] anti-aliasing technology is subjectively better than anything I've seen on MacOS or Linux. Note, this is an admittedly subjective evaluation. I found a Q&A [grc.com] that speaks to the technical quality of ClearType that is beyond my comprehension. The fact is, my eyes have never been happier! I work heavily with numbers and text. Show me how to anti-alias old Linux apps like xv and rxvt, and I'm yours!
As a longtime Windows user who does appreciate Linux, what keeps me from making the switch are three common issues that I and the thousands of Linux advocates and zealots still haven't resolved:
1. I, like most Windows users, spend a lot on Windows software. Windows software typically costs about $40-80 online or in stores. That's quite an investment. In order to let go of Windows I would have to write off my investment in software as a sunk cost. But what if I want to keep using that software? What do I do, toss it out? Maybe I should sell it all off on eBay? This is why Linux is an easier sell to first time computer users; there isn't an established dependency. There is a good amount of good software that doesn't run on WINE or any of the WINE spinoffs. Testing to see if my apps will work under Linux can require that I pay good money for Win4Lin or VMWare. WINEX is a gamble since I have to pay before I can try it out, and according to the site, none of what I run works!
2. I like my a Windows apps. I don't abandon my apps just because there's a new operating system in town. I still use a few DOS and Windows 3.1 apps. I also have MacOS and Amiga apps sitting around. Why should I abandon my favorite apps like MS Office XP or The Sims (I've bought all the expansions) just because there are shiny new alternatives available on Linux? At the end of the day, I bought my computer in order to compute, not so that I can fight a revolution. Being a Stallmanista is kinda cool too, but I want to use what I want to use... ultimately isn't Linux and open-source about freedom of choice?
3. I need to use specialized proprietary applications like SPSS, and I happen to use some hardware that isn't support under anything but Windows. For some apps, I just can't use an alternative. And for the hardware, I'm not talking about winmodems, I''m talking about video capture devices and software that rely on the current DirectX and DirectShow. It doesn't matter whether an alternative exists, I won't use it for reasons other than stubborness.
So far, the only solution has been dual-booting, which has its own problems, and purchasing a second computer.
Re:Mod me troll flamebait or whatever but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Might encourage them to try it but it also makes them less likely to stick with it when they find thing don't work quite right. A different appearance helps people with the learning experience because they have visual cues that things ARE different. Mimicking XP's appearance will mean they're constantly caught off guard by small differences, and they'll find that harder to cope with than bigger differences would have been.
Re:Here's an idea (Score:2, Troll)
The purpose of actually swapping out the UI in Windows and running GNU/X/etc. over the kernel frankly escapes me. The Win32 kernel isn't particularly sturdy and doesn't itself really offer any benefits over, say, the Linux or BSD kernel.
Re:Here's an idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Here's an idea (Score:3, Interesting)
KDE and GNOME wouldn't be that hard. It would really only involve usage of native ports of their respective toolkits (Qt Win32 non commercial edition and GTK+2)
Keep in mind there are other alternatives like LiteStep etc.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wow (Score:2)
Re:Can Open Source produce anything ORIGINAL? (Score:3, Interesting)
Howabout
Apache? or OpenGL ?
Now let me see
What operating system is your favorite search engine Google built upon?
How long was the internet/browsers around before Microsoft decided it better implement a web-browser?
Are there any Movie players that beat MPlayer ?
nope, not that i've come across.
How long has GCC been around ?
I could go on listing stuff here but then you are probably a
What a troll! (Score:3, Insightful)
* Unify the desktop
Linux is about choice. Gnome and KDE are easy enough to pick up. Choose one. Learn it. It's not that difficult.
* Easy installation.
SuSE is easier to install than XP in my experience. It can also auto setup a dual boot system and resize NTFS partitions automagically.
* Hardware support that JUST WORKS.
NVidia graphics drivers JUST WORK when you run the installer. Some dists will auto-install all hardware drivers, and even download them if the