Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Sep 2005 21:06 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Window Managers EDE 1.0.4 is a new version of EDE (Equinox Desktop Environment) which brings full FreeBSD support, various bugfixes and new features. The Equinox Desktop Environment is a small desktop environment, built to be simple, to have a familiar look and feel and to be reasonably fast.
Order by: Score:
v Not bad
by Tom K on Thu 1st Sep 2005 21:28 UTC
RE: Not bad
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 21:45 UTC in reply to "Not bad"
Anonymous Member since:
---

It's not bloat, it's refinement. I can just see you now, hurling all over your keyboard at the mere sight of KDE or Gnome - LOL. This thing looks so dated it's not even funny. Clean lines? It's Windows 95 UI, ported to *nix. Ugly as hell, amateurish at best. They can certainly do better than this.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Not bad
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:02 UTC in reply to "Not bad"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Nice try, but the first sentence in your post doesn't it make it any less obvious that you're just a sad little troll.

Reply Score: 0

Maybe on older hardware?
by QuadSix50 on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:00 UTC
QuadSix50
Member since:
2005-07-07

Consider that this might be great for some older hardware that can't handle KDE, Gnome, or even XFCE. Yes, there are others, but they are mearly windows managers. This seems to give a nice desktop to users that might still have an old computer laying around.

It might even be a reason to install Linux on an older machine that can be donated to someone who might not have one. Things to consider...

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Maybe on older hardware?
by Tom K on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:39 UTC in reply to "Maybe on older hardware?"
RE[2]: Maybe on older hardware?
by rm6990 on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 02:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Maybe on older hardware?"
rm6990 Member since:
2005-07-04

Thank you. At least one person here sees it. :-|

KDE/GNOME are poo. This is pretty slick. Low memory usage, looks clean, still provides a desktop environment -- win, win, win.


What is with you and poo??? Do you enjoy the smell or taste of it??? Do you like playing with your poo??? Or are you just not smart enough to come up with a more intelligent term than "I hate this so it is poo"???

Just curious is all.

Reply Score: 1

Neato
by ma_d on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:00 UTC
ma_d
Member since:
2005-06-29

(EDE's window manager use less memory than xterm).

chris@brittney:~/ejourn$ cat /proc/`pidof xterm`/status
Name: xterm
State: S (sleeping)
SleepAVG: 98%
Tgid: 6986
Pid: 6986
PPid: 1
TracerPid: 0
Uid: 1000 1000 1000 1000
Gid: 1000 43 43 43
FDSize: 256
Groups: 4 20 24 25 29 30 44 46 107 108 109 1000
VmSize: 8828 kB
VmLck: 0 kB
VmRSS: 3708 kB
VmData: 1732 kB
VmStk: 84 kB

That just says it all....

Reply Score: 2

Windows 95
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:09 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

was the best OS ever..

Reply Score: 0

I think it...
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:27 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

...looks great.

Reply Score: 0

freebsd support?
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:38 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

This is the only wm I've ever seen specifically mention freebsd support. What exactly does that mean? Did it not build on freebsd before? I'm confused. I've tried many window managers on both freebsd and linux (and openbsd, actually). I've never seen a need for specific OS support. Could someone give me a clue?

Reply Score: 1

RE: freebsd support?
by eMagius on Thu 1st Sep 2005 23:19 UTC in reply to "freebsd support?"
eMagius Member since:
2005-07-06

Essentially, there were some bugs in the EDE code that slipped past unnoticed on Linux, but were problematic on other platforms. Those bugs have now been squashed, so it [apparently] now works well on FreeBSD.

Reply Score: 2

Like ICE Wm
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:40 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Looks alot like Ice wm which is also lightweight...anyone have experience with both and clues as to what features would differentiate?

Reply Score: 0

RE: Like ICE Wm
by eMagius on Thu 1st Sep 2005 23:18 UTC in reply to "Like ICE Wm"
eMagius Member since:
2005-07-06

IceWM (which is my preferred WM) is really just a WM (which isn't a bad thing, in my book). Equinox is a desktop environment with desktop icon support, configuration windows, control panel, package manager, and so forth.

I haven't tried Equinox in a while (several years), but when I last used it, it felt very limited and kludgy. I've never had that problem with IceWM (or Fluxbox, my other WM of choice).

It may very well have greatly improved since.

Reply Score: 1

themes
by broken_symlink on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:43 UTC
broken_symlink
Member since:
2005-07-06

the themes aren't that that bad either. the flat theme looks cool. i've never seen anything like that before. it kinda reminds me of icewm.

Reply Score: 1

Win98
by Angryanderson on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:48 UTC
Angryanderson
Member since:
2005-07-11

Win98 was a great GUI -- not too pretty but lightweight and functional. From there on the Microsoft GUI's have gone downhill all the way...

The xfe file manager is a perfect fit for Equinox Desktop Environment.

Reply Score: 1

Guh.
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 22:53 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Why does "familiar look and feel" always tends to mean "Explorer rip off"?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Guh.
by rm6990 on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 02:16 UTC in reply to "Guh."
rm6990 Member since:
2005-07-04

Why does "familiar look and feel" always tends to mean "Explorer rip off"?

Possibly because familiar means something people are used too, and pretty much everyone has used the Explorer shell for Windows??? I don't think there is much innovation here, but the reasoning behind the term couldn't be anymore obvious.

Reply Score: 1

Nice
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 23:11 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

As lame as it may seem to some (kde/gnome/etc users) I think it has a place if its as light and usable as it is made out to be. It could be a contender on the girlfriends PII PC as a MS replacement. If it runs firefox/thunderbird/Ooo/skype, has freedesktop tray icon support, a clipboard and a resonably integrated file manager then its a winner - not for my desktop though.

Reply Score: 1

v Yawn ........
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 23:14 UTC
RE: Yawn ........
by DigitalAxis on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 03:32 UTC in reply to "Yawn ........"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

Well, I doubt the existence of Equinox Desktop Environment is going to inhibit the efforts of the Gnome and KDE developers attempting to push out new high-end desktop concepts.

That said, I do wonder why Equinox Desktop has to look just like Windows Explorer. Clean? Maybe. Do they need to include gray menus and simulated 3D-ness? I guess I define clean as clearly demarcated buttons and options, with as little other distracting visual information- you know, the flat background or large pattern, the buttons that change color/brightness when you mouse over them...

Mac OS X, XFCE, KDE and Gnome have all got nice clean interfaces where things look flat, and the button bars and menus need not have all the trimmings to make them look 3D, or make them look gray and thus less contrast. Even Windows XP Classic mode defaults to a lighter, higher contrast gray.

Reply Score: 1

xpde anyone?
by kwanbis on Thu 1st Sep 2005 23:15 UTC
kwanbis
Member since:
2005-07-06
RE: xpde anyone?
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 00:49 UTC in reply to "xpde anyone?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

No sorry...

> [xpde] tries to make easier for Windows XP users to use a
> Linux box. Nothing more, no clipboard compatibility
> between Gtk and Qt applications, no emulation of
> Windows applications, no unification on the widgets of
> X applications, just a desktop environment.

If their goal is making life easier for XP-to-Linux movers then the second sentence means they're failing right at the beginning.

- Morin

Reply Score: 0

RE: xpde anyone?
by chip_0 on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 06:28 UTC in reply to "xpde anyone?"
chip_0 Member since:
2005-07-12

"xpde anyone?"

Oh but whats the point? XPDE aims at providing a very close to Windows XP style GUI for users who just can't get used to anything different.

EDI is not really trying to be as close to win9x as possible. It maintains similiarities in its taskbar, menu style and some functionality, but what it really aims for is to provide a complete desktop environment for people with old computers. Its actually quite nice and usable.

Reply Score: 1

Low resources
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Sep 2005 23:36 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Anything that tries to make a low resource enviroment is a good thing, I DON'T CARE how it looks (not too much) the less clutter and bells the better.

But it also has to be VERY use-able.

Resource saving is important even in these days of big hard drives and ram, simply because now we can do larger jobs like video editing...


...or we would be able to do so without a hitch, if our OS's were not wasting all of our newly aquired resources.

Reply Score: 0

Anonymous Coward
Member since:
2005-07-06

So ... how about

EDE
SIAG Office (http://siag.nu/)
Light Web Browser (http://www.ne.jp/asahi/linux/timecop/)
Amulet Explorer (http://www.amuletexplorer.com/)

I have run this all on a K6-2 350 under IceWM instead of EDE, but I think EDE would be the kicker to tie it all together, no more playing with deskmenu for icons.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Windows 95
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 01:29 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Win9x was actually decent, when WinME & 2k i gave it up for Linux, i still dualboot Win9x & Slackware...

Reply Score: 0

Lightweight? Cool!
by rx182 on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 01:35 UTC
rx182
Member since:
2005-07-08

I didn't try EDE yet but it "looks" promising. They worked alot on a 2.0 version this summer (google summer of code) according to the guys blogs.

I don't understand why some people are bitching against new WM/DE. There's place for more of em (DE). Gnome and KDE are both ressource hugs and some people can't live with that. It's not all about old hardware trust me.

Anyway, to me the worst thing that happened to Linux was the arrival of GTK and QT because so much people started to use em exclusively. And of course, both are ressource hugs. Look at EFL (Enlightenment Foundation Library), it produces way better output than GTK and QT and it uses way less ressources. Lesson? People should look at alternatives sometimes.

Reply Score: 3

morganth
Member since:
2005-07-13

I think anyone who is using Linux is looking at the alternatives. But one can only go so far in picking alternatives before you become the only user of that particular system configuration.

I agree: GTK and QT get all the attention, and aren't all that some people jazz them up to be. Both have innovative features, both have lots of good general support, but neither one is blazing fast. My friend and I were just lamenting how lame it is that gedit takes 3 or 4 seconds to start up on a 1.6Ghz machine. We were even more depressed when Leafpad, which is essentially a GtkTextView in a window, took about a second (according to "time").

We understand that these applications, gedit in particular, are actually pretty powerful, but we can't possibly blame all this startup time on the actual allocation of data structures gedit uses, etc. It has to be that a huge overhead is incurred just by creating that darn window and drawing it to the screen.

Even I wrote a really simple PyGTK application that reads rfc8222 email files, and it ended up being about 150 lines of PyGTK code, but still takes ~2 secs to load up and display the email message.

The libraries (either GTK or lower down at Xlib) aren't optimized. That's the bottom line.

I, personally, am gonna get started profiling the code and seeing where the bottlenecks are, using my spare time in the upcoming weeks. One of my friends lent me Optimizing Linux Performance, which will hopefully point me in the right direction. Anyone want to help out?

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous Member since:
---

There was some profiling done recently on this very issue (I forget the link but a bit of Googling should reveal it). AFAICR the problem is not anything Gtk or X does per se but that Gtk uses a lot of X calls at startup which are synchronous - i.e. the app must wait the round-trip time from app to X-server before proceeding. The conclusion was to either reduce the number of synchronous calls or to shedule the calls in their own thread where possible so that they don't impact on launch performance.

This is similar, in principle, to the efforts to reduce boot time on Linux machines by a) reducing the number of init scripts called at boot and b) running those which do not depend on one another in parallel. The latest OS X tiger uses approach b) I think which results in a far shorter 'loading OS X' progress bar display in my case.

Reply Score: 0

DE confusion
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 03:18 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'm a bit confused about the Desktop Environment on Linux.

We have GNOME and KDE which are also DEs right?

OK, so there are applications which only run on one or the other (or have I mistaken this), because of coding a GNOME v a KDE app?

So, this DE will not be able to run any GNOME or KDE apps right? Or just a few or all?

Reply Score: 0

RE: DE confusion
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 03:31 UTC in reply to "DE confusion"
Anonymous Member since:
---

they require a "toolkit" qt or gtk, to use apps from the other DE you have to have it's toolkit.

so if you have gtk and qt installed on your computer then you can run any apps with this thing. (although some only come packaged in larger base files requiring you to download the entire DE anyway (see Konqueror)

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: DE confusion
by DigitalAxis on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 03:58 UTC in reply to "RE: DE confusion"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

Not that this should really make anyone try Gentoo, but Gentoo has broken up the KDE ebuilds so now you CAN install *just* Konqueror (and kdelibs and Qt3, but you'd kinda need them to run a KDE program). I've seen it done (did it myself on a computer I sorta "administrate") and it works, though you miss all the integration with kioslaves and other KDE applications.

Reply Score: 1

RE:EDE 1.0.4 Released
by TusharG on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 03:27 UTC
TusharG
Member since:
2005-07-06

Looks cool. Nice to see so many choices are available for people using Linux/Unix. I didnt even know that Window Manager called EDE exists! I dont want to get into fight of how useable it is. I'm just happy to see one more choice, after all GUN = freedom to choose right?
I need to ask this guy to add the EDE to the list. http://xwinman.org/

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]:EDE 1.0.4 Released
by Anonymous Coward on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 10:07 UTC in reply to "RE:EDE 1.0.4 Released"
Anonymous Coward Member since:
2005-07-06

I Love Xwinman.org...

Click on Others under Desktops. The full name (in the article) is Equinox Desktop Environment.

It's been there for years.

Reply Score: 1

Equinox
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 03:38 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

What's with Open Source projects and animal names? Is this a "furry" thing? I'm really disgusted by the "furry community" and would like to keep it disjoint from the Open Source community.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Equinox
by DigitalAxis on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 04:07 UTC in reply to "Equinox"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

Equinox? I'm an astronomy major, and I'm pretty sure the term is an astronomical term (like 'Zenith', namesake of that TV company).
As I know the term, 'Equinox' is "Equi Nox", which translates from Latin(?) to "Equal Night" and refers to the two days a year when the length of night is equal to the length of day. These occur famously around March 21 (start of spring) and September 21 (start of fall); and they change slightly from year.

If it refers to animals or angry people I'm not aware of it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Equinox
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 07:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Equinox"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Oh, haha, I was thinking Equine (horse). Thanks for the good response.

Reply Score: 0

Great!
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 04:00 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Very fast and beautiful. Perfect on old hardware. Indeed, FLTK is a great C++ GUI toolkit.

Reply Score: 0

Migration
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 04:33 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I suppose this would be nice for someone who is used to windows 2000 pro...

Reply Score: 0

Looks nice
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 05:24 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

All it needs is a distro behind it, unless there's already one I'm unaware of.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Looks nice
by Anonymous on Sat 3rd Sep 2005 10:57 UTC in reply to "Looks nice"
Anonymous Member since:
---

There is a distro in developement called STX:
http://linux.mikeasoft.com/stxcc/
http://vljubovic.members.epn.ba/stxcc.png

Reply Score: 0

Nothing New
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 06:33 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

EDE its a great proyect but thankful in OSS movement not only exist GNOME or KDE or XFCE, we already have some greats Lightweight enviorenment.

My favorite who I use daily is Wmaker, its small and fast fast fast. Combined with a lightweight file manager and some cool utils like fuse with netsmb and sshfs you get all the power.

Could be great see a DE with all this integrated and with frontend config tools for average users.

It is sad to see as great projects like wmaker don't have all the attention that would have.

Reply Score: 0

Ubuntu Lite
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 07:25 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I believe EDE is the preferred desktop environment for an upcoming Ubuntu Lite release:

http://www.ubuntulite.org/
http://ubuntulite.org/wiki/index.php/Desktop_environment

Reply Score: 0

great effort
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 08:47 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Personally I think EDE is a _great_ effort. It's awsome with the familiar simplicity found in the win9x environment, and while IceWM, XPDE and the likes are ok, they just don't cut it.

Us geeks can use "innovation" on our own workstations, but try pushing linux with kde/gnome onto 500 windows users who normally call support in panic when one of their icons have changed place on the windows desktop.

I can't live without Fluxbox myself, but I wouldn't dream of forcing it on a regular user.

I'm watching EDE with great interest for our organization.

Reply Score: 0

Ignorance abounds...
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 09:17 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Before you comment, why don't you go to the site, find out the state of the project, the purpose of the project, and the goals of the project? Dolts.

Many comments here are so off base it's embarassing.

Reply Score: 0

icewm, xpde, fvwm...
by hobgoblin on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 13:07 UTC
hobgoblin
Member since:
2005-07-06

any others that can recreate the win9x feel?

Reply Score: 1

Weather you like it or not.
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 13:46 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Windows has set a UI standard that most users start on. This UI is not bad at all. Im all for familiarity since it eases transitions. Besides KDE 1 was not all that sexy compared to E and Windowmaker now look at it. I cant help but think that this WM will do great things.

-nX

Reply Score: 0

Desktop Management
by Anonymous on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 14:45 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

You know, it's just not that big a deal to recreate the look of Windows. Icons in the upper left corner of the screen, taskbar and icon tray along the bottom, and a pull-up menu in the lower-left hand corner. A nice, sky-blue background or wallpaper just enhances the illusion. Any number of Window Managers or GUIs can do that. Heck, it doesn't take but a minute to make BeOS have that "familiar look".
More important than the look, though, is its usability. Windows generally offers two or three different ways of doing things, from the menu, to Mac-Style window browsing to the icon tray to simply browsing through the file manager. However one may dislike Microsoft, their desktop does offer interesting, usable, and easily-customizable features. "Merely" duplicating the MS desktop is still an impressive feat, and not to be sneered at.
Still, I've really been impressed by the XFCE desktop.

Reply Score: 0

Roll-Your-Own Desktop Environment
by macsnafu on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 17:40 UTC
macsnafu
Member since:
2005-08-26

In the course of trying out various window managers and desktop environments, I've been wondering why it isn't easier to just set up your own environment. Choose a basic window manager, a desktop menu, a taskbar, an icon tray, a dockbar or app launcher, pager, and a file manager. Or not include any of those things that you don't want or use.
Alas, it doesn't seem to be that easy. Some programs and managers just don't mesh very well.

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous Member since:
---

Oh yeah, exactly what I've been thinking.

However, it would require a lot of standards, not yet in exsistence. And several compatibiliy-layers. We would need a WSAL (Widget Set Abstraction Layer) and a DEAL (Desktop Environment Abstraction Layer). Unfortunately, this is far from trivial, due to major differences between widget sets and between DE-libraries. And not to forget all other kinds of low-level libraries.

At the moment, you're constricted to the DE you choose and its following widget set (or tool kit, if you like that term better). Within this DE you can choose whatever WM you'd like, and the same goes for taskbar, systray and so on.

dylansmrjones
kristian AT herkild DOT dk

Reply Score: 0

blah
by Anonymous on Sat 3rd Sep 2005 06:49 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I still feel, that adopting better GUI for graphical things would be right to linux and key to success. And I think it should be BeOS (that means Haiku, of course). It's very clean, easy to use, fun for developers and not bloated at all.

Reply Score: 0