Re: What *is* Gnome/KDE?
Karsten krabbed,
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 07:27:11AM -0600, hawk@hawkins.cba.uni.edu wrote:
> > Karsten kried,
> > cross application cut and paste. Come to think of it, that's the *only*
> > thing I've seen either of these offer that I've seen any use for . . .
> > I'm quite happy with xterms, LyX, and a nice grey interweaved desktop.
> > Everythingt else takes extra cycles or screen real estate (and I'm not
> > to happy that I can't remove the buttons within lyx for this same reason
> > . . .)
> ...only when the X paste buffer isn't available. It works pretty well
> for me. MSFT's six-action CnP just kills me. Two clicks, that's all it
> takes. Though option to clear the target field would be nice....
Oh, I much prefer X's version for almost everything. But I can see the
value in being able to move images, etc.
I am *not* trying to defend MSFT, though I find them funny. A friend
went to save a one page document to floppy, and it wouldn't fit. Seems
he'd pasted in an image from excel, and it used every known format . . .
> > > > I know Gnome and KDE are called "environments", but they still only
> > > > look like...errrm...a tweaked MS task bar and program launcher.
> > > Funny, I see the same thing <g>.
> > Nah, it's a tweak of the MS ripoff of MacOs 5.0/multifinder, with one
> > or two $20 shareware extensions . . .
> Wait! The Alto!! What about the Alto?!!
OK, what about Raskin's master's thesis? :)
I drew the cutoff at 5.0/multifinder due to what's there. The tasks cycle
and list,(gee, the bar at the bottom) [oops, they stopped cycling with
multifinder; that was the switcher], a heirarchical extension (choose
from a couple) gives you the whole start menu, boomerang did a better
job of providing recent files, and I think you have the whole W95 interface.
Some of this wasn't in earlier versions of Mac, or the other windowing
systems. (no, I don't think the GUI started with apple [Although
Raskin may have a claim, and he helped apple do it . . .]). ob trivia:
the lisa interface predated the PARC visit . . .
> > > Well, aside from the all-too-cool dock on the right of my monitor....
> > > Yes, I run WindowMaker and like it. Clean, quick, handy keyboard
> > > accelerators, stable. I'll occasionally fire up KDE or Gnome for kicks.
> > gee, do you kick puppies, too? :) put hamsters in microwaves?
> My lawyer will be in touch with you. Don't move.
Sorry, he can't sue me due to professional courtesy :) [But now
I'm a recovering lawyer. It's one day at a time, but I've been clean
for nearly six years . . .]
> > > There's nothing "required" in Gnome or KDE.
> I meant -- there's nothing required in Gnome or KDE that you can't get
> without them. Yes, there are requirements *for* both, particularly
> memory (even my 96 MB box slows down under them).
Oh, in that case :) I will admit to having KDE on the FreeBSD box
at home for the kids. But I haven't gone as far as figuring out how to
get it to start netscape. It does seem to save their session, though.
I refuse to let it near the internet running windows . . . come to think
of it, I need to get the sound card working (it's a wierd one) and see
if I even *need* windows for the old progams they use now that I have
a reasonably recent version of wine . .
> > Oh, and the dependency of gnumeric on gnome leads to gnomes dependencies
> > on sound managagers and the like--even though there's no sound card . . .
> Gee. Fun.
there was a simple solution :) And on the same day I deleted them,
I figured out how to get lynx to a light background in X (though it only
works in debian, not freebsd for some reason), and to spawn a new lynx for
links, letting me dump netscape . . .
> > > nothing else running on commercial Unix that comes close (I'm not
> > > counting Mac OS X as it's not based on X Windows and isn't a full Unix
> > > despite its Mach core).
> > But on top of the mach core there is a full unix as I understand it,
> > including an Xserver that coexists with the mac display
> More info?
i'm sure it's out there :)
More seriously, though I don't have links to back it up, my understanding
is that X apps can display under MacOs X, and that the whole unix stuff
is there, just hidden from view of those that don't have a reason to
go looking. Assuming that a high-end fortran 90/95/00 compiler is
avaialble, it's entirely possible that I'll ask for one of these
at my next university for my desk machine.
hawk
Reply to: