Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:17 UTC, submitted by Benedikt Meurer
Xfce The Xfce project has released the first beta in the 4.4 release cycle. "Xfce 4.4 beta1 (4.3.90.1) is now available for download. Xfce 4.4 features new tools such as the much anticipated 'Thunar' file manager as well as several huge improvements of its core components."
Order by: Score:
Good work
by Drune on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:31 UTC
Drune
Member since:
2005-12-04

Xfce is getting pretty good. With high release cycles, xfce team make good improvements in later versions.Xfce can make you forget gnome in older machines.. I used it in several old machines, and that's great. Simplicity and Speed are the keys for Xfce success.

Reply Score: 4

I love Xfce
by jackson on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:51 UTC
jackson
Member since:
2005-06-29

For me, Xfce offers the best combination of speed and functionality. I love what Olivier Fourdan, Benedikt Meurer, and all the other Xfce devs are doing.

Great job!!

Reply Score: 4

RE: I love Xfce
by .Joe on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:56 UTC in reply to "I love Xfce"
.Joe Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, I really don't understand why Xfce isn't more popular. Is there any reason why this DE isn't the defult for more distros than is currently so?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I love Xfce
by Wintermute on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:00 UTC in reply to "RE: I love Xfce"
Wintermute Member since:
2005-07-30

I can't give you a completely accurate answer, but my guess is that Xfce lacks mindshare marketing. I mean look at KDE4, although it's no where near completion, people are quite excited about plasma and the possibility of running KDE on windows.

Then there is the issue of target audience. While Xfce isn't really limited to low end machines, if you're designing a modern distro, I think it makes more sense to use KDE and GNOME as your DE of choice.

I am sure there are more issues involved as well such as the tight cooperation between the respective toolkits and KDE and GNOME. While Xfce uses gtk, GNOME probably has more influence over how gtk is developed.

Reply Score: 3

RE: I love Xfce
by w00dst0ck on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:57 UTC in reply to "I love Xfce"
w00dst0ck Member since:
2006-02-01

Indeed! The Xfce devs are doing a great job and it just seems to be getting better and better.

Thunar is looking great and was IMHO the only thing I felt that was missing... and I always hated using nautilus (personal choice) because it just felt bulky next to the rest of xfce.

Going to install it tonight and see how it runs.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I love Xfce
by Adam S on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:59 UTC in reply to "RE: I love Xfce"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Well, Xfce has always had its own file manager, XFFM. Thunar is supposedly a less complicated fm, since XFFM was often times confusing. So you could've used that. In addition, many people are very happy with the combo of Xfce+ROX, which, if I recall, is also the default setup of FreesBIE, which is a FreeBSD live cd.

Edited 2006-04-17 22:01

Reply Score: 5

Improvements? Where?
by ziggamon on Mon 17th Apr 2006 21:57 UTC
ziggamon
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd love to read all about those improvements, but unfortunately, I'm unable to find a simple Changelog or NEWS file anywhere... Anyone have a link?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Improvements? Where?
by jaboua on Mon 17th Apr 2006 23:27 UTC in reply to "Improvements? Where?"
jaboua Member since:
2005-09-08

It says something here, but it's not a complete changelog:
http://blog.xfce.org/?p=130

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Improvements? Where?
by bmeurer on Tue 18th Apr 2006 00:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Improvements? Where?"
bmeurer Member since:
2006-04-17

Unfortunately, there's no overall ChangeLog/NEWS available for Xfce 4.4BETA1. I've put together an overview of the major changes in 4.4BETA1 with screenshots:

http://xfce-diary.blogspot.com/2006/04/major-changes-in-xfce-44beta...

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Improvements? Where?
by jcinacio on Tue 18th Apr 2006 00:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Improvements? Where?"
jcinacio Member since:
2006-03-12

Unfortunately, there's no overall ChangeLog/NEWS available for Xfce 4.4BETA1. I've put together an overview of the major changes in 4.4BETA1 with screenshots:

Thanks, it looks pretty good actually!

I have to say Xfce is great for anyone looking to get into light, clean and fast DE.
My hope is that not only it keeps improving but also that it stays that true to itself ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Improvements? Where?
by w00dst0ck on Tue 18th Apr 2006 01:06 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Improvements? Where?"
w00dst0ck Member since:
2006-02-01

Nice, great job! Looks good too ;) .

Reply Score: 1

Huge improvements?
by irbis on Mon 17th Apr 2006 22:01 UTC
irbis
Member since:
2005-07-08

So, what might those "several huge improvements" be, besides of Thunar (that has already been available)? Is there a changelog hidden somewhere, or could somebody give more information?

Reply Score: 1

one thing missing: audio
by Terracotta on Mon 17th Apr 2006 22:03 UTC
Terracotta
Member since:
2005-08-15

The only thing I would have liked would be a (very much slimmed down) amarok kind of audio player. Amarok has too many featurs for old machines, but it's a ****ing good audio player. And maybe a videoplayer? Just basic functions, not too much. For the rest I installed it for my brother on his computer and he hasn't complaind. :-).

Reply Score: 2

RE: one thing missing: audio
by maydaytx on Mon 17th Apr 2006 22:23 UTC in reply to "one thing missing: audio"
maydaytx Member since:
2006-04-17

Did you try xfmedia? It can be downloaded here:
http://spuriousinterrupt.org/projects/xfmedia

Reply Score: 2

Xfmedia
by irbis on Mon 17th Apr 2006 22:28 UTC
irbis
Member since:
2005-07-08

I hope that XFce will keep and continue its nononsense approach and goals of simplicity, lightweightness and effectiveness. However, there may still be quite much to do if(?) XFce would want to become as easy to use a desktop also for non-experienced users like what KDE and GNOME have achieved.

One tool of Xfce4 that I like quite much, and find it promising, is its simple mediaplayer Xfmedia. Why, you may ask - aren't there several much more capable media players out there? Maybe so, but I just HATE all those themeable and skinnable mediaplayers with horrible usability, non standard GUIs, unusable default skins, unclear and too small buttons etc. A very "good" example: XMMS... Why the heck should anybody need to find/make a custom skin in order to make his media player look like the rest of the desktop?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Xfmedia
by berzerko on Tue 18th Apr 2006 01:34 UTC in reply to "Xfmedia"
berzerko Member since:
2005-11-11

i dont think XMMS is supposed to "fit in" with a desktop. it was designed after Winamp and one of the main features is that its fully skinnable. this was around the time before KDE and GNOME got big so everybody was using plain windowmanagers. integration wasnt as big a deal.

Thats why now KDE and GNOME have their own integrated media players. because for a long time xmms was THE media player for linux(imho), but then the issue of integration became more important as the Desktop environments matured. Xfmedia is just now following the lead of kde and gnome.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Xfmedia
by Soulbender on Tue 18th Apr 2006 05:35 UTC in reply to "Xfmedia"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"However, there may still be quite much to do if(?) XFce would want to become as easy to use a desktop also for non-experienced users like what KDE and GNOME have achieved."

That's not necessarily a goal for XFCE.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Xfmedia
by aquila_deus on Tue 18th Apr 2006 17:10 UTC in reply to "Xfmedia"
aquila_deus Member since:
2005-10-02

Talking about the stardand GUIs: The widgets xfce created and used by itself is a big pain in ass - you can't even leave a dialog box with ESC or click ok by ENTER where there isn't any other button!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Xfmedia
by irbis on Tue 18th Apr 2006 17:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Xfmedia"
irbis Member since:
2005-07-08

"The widgets xfce created and used by itself is a big pain in ass"

Maybe so, I dunno? But my point was that at least Xfmedia uses a relatively clear and clean interface, and not some all black and messy default skin of XMMS where you cannot even tell the buttons from the background... Cheesh, haven't the designers of such default GUIs/skins never heard anything about usability??

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Xfmedia
by negativity on Tue 18th Apr 2006 17:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Xfmedia"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

Beep media player is a version of Xmms and it spouses a brighter/easier on the eye theme. Many Xfce users like BMP.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Xfmedia
by irbis on Tue 18th Apr 2006 18:06 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Xfmedia"
irbis Member since:
2005-07-08

Many Xfce users like BMP

Yeah, me too (although I usually use GNOME and not XFce). However, my problem with the Beep Media Player is - as I use a big 1600*1200 resolution - that the BMP windows are a bit too tiny and I can hardly see the buttons not to mention the song titles on its tiny windows. XMMS does have one small but nice feature (missing from BMP) of allowing to make its main window double sized that helps users of big screens like me. Other than that I certainly like BMP more than XMMS though.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Xfmedia
by Tom Janowitz on Tue 18th Apr 2006 19:16 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Xfmedia"
Tom Janowitz Member since:
2005-12-05

I dont know what monitor you have, but presume it's 19" - and monitor with this diagonal is ment to work with resolutions up to 1440x1080 (for a .25mm dot pitch) - that's becouse of a size of dot pitch - when setting resolution higher then 'width/hight of screen' / 'width/hight of dot pitch' quality of image generated from CRT's gradually degrades... or so theory says ;) . The point is - everyone should more or less have approximately the same dpi "resolution" - granted that people tend to use their monitors at optimal settings. And at the same dpi bmp will look the same from one monitor to another.
I suggest downgrading resolution or acquiring 21" ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Xfmedia
by irbis on Tue 18th Apr 2006 21:01 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Xfmedia"
irbis Member since:
2005-07-08

As to screen resolutions, and so although I use a 1600x1200 resolution with a (good) 19'' monitor, I have usually no problems whatsoever with programs following standard GNOME, KDE or XFce interface guidelines. I only tend to have problems with these many (usually skinnable) mediaplayers like BMP and XMMS...

I see absolutely no reason to downgrade my monitor resolution, not to mention buying a bigger monitor(!), just in order to better use some freaking media player that prefers to have smaller than normal buttons... I rather choose another mediaplayer that just works like I want it to work. That's why I said that I like Xfmedia, and think that it has at least potential, because of its relatively clear, no-nonsense interface.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Xfmedia
by Tom Janowitz on Tue 18th Apr 2006 23:08 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Xfmedia"
Tom Janowitz Member since:
2005-12-05

Yeah - it is problem with those two, but I am not aware of other examples of such 'bad design'. Morevover - they don't function properly under WM's such as ION. But I see it rather as exception rather than rule.
I am just looking at this Xfms and must admit I like it - certailny something worth considering...
And my suggestion .... shouldn't have taken it seriously ;) but who knows - maybe someone will change monitor in order to see larger buttons in BMP.

Reply Score: 1

great
by cg0def on Mon 17th Apr 2006 22:33 UTC
cg0def
Member since:
2006-02-12

well first of all XFCE is not more popular because it still does not have most of the tools that a regular desktop user needs. But to fair to the DE it is getting there pretty fast. What I personally like about xfce4 is not the speed but the fact that these guys actually try out new ideas. Some work and some don't but the bottom like is that for any project ( closed or open sourced ) to succeed you need inovation and unfortunatelly a great deal of the linux related ones lack that inovation.
I kinda wish that xfce4 would come with it's own lightweight usable lightweight desktop space ( so that you can actually save stuff on your desktop ) but it is what it is. Oh that new filemanager is great and while I'm not sure that a new archiver was needed, it's also a welcomed addition.

Reply Score: 1

RE: great
by maydaytx on Mon 17th Apr 2006 22:51 UTC in reply to "great"
maydaytx Member since:
2006-04-17

"I kinda wish that xfce4 would come with it's own lightweight usable lightweight desktop space ( so that you can actually save stuff on your desktop ) but it is what it is."

The svn version of xfdesktop+thunar has been capable of desktop icons since February. I'm not sure, but I believe that this functionality is included in this release. It need some work, but it is very usable. (I'm using it right now)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: great
by jaboua on Tue 18th Apr 2006 11:43 UTC in reply to "RE: great"
jaboua Member since:
2005-09-08

I think he meant saving normal files on the desktop, not having desktop icons

Reply Score: 1

Thunar
by Tom K on Mon 17th Apr 2006 23:14 UTC
Tom K
Member since:
2005-07-06

Thunar looks like a tabbed Finder with hierarchical directory expansion. I kind of like it.

But why are the fonts so OMG-huge? This is typical of a lot of GTK apps I've noticed.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Thunar
by JMcCarthy on Tue 18th Apr 2006 01:08 UTC in reply to "Thunar"
JMcCarthy Member since:
2005-08-12

At least they've managed to dump XFFM.

It's beyond me why everyone who seems to use GTK+ has adopted a 'big is beautiful' policy, at least by default.

You can easily have a GTK+ application without 400lb layouts/fonts.

Edited 2006-04-18 01:09

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Thunar
by Alex Forster on Tue 18th Apr 2006 05:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Thunar"
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

You know, that's the first thing I noticed about the KDE live CD. The fonts are huge. And I bet some anonymous GNU UI expert reasons this as 'enhanced readability.' But the words are SO big that, at 1024x768, part of most words scale my eye-perception span, and they end up actually being harder to read as my eye has to move several times over each word instead of over groups of words.

I should post that to some mailing list somewhere...

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Thunar
by Ookaze on Tue 18th Apr 2006 14:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Thunar"
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

You know, that's the first thing I noticed about the KDE live CD. The fonts are huge. And I bet some anonymous GNU UI expert reasons this as 'enhanced readability.'

Flamebait comments came to your mind before technical explanations. Typical.

But the words are SO big that, at 1024x768, part of most words scale my eye-perception span, and they end up actually being harder to read as my eye has to move several times over each word instead of over groups of words.
I should post that to some mailing list somewhere...


You should rather setup your font size differently, now that that your monitor DPI are correctly used.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Thunar
by Tom K on Tue 18th Apr 2006 15:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Thunar"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

How does the manner in which the parent made his comments change the facts at all? A lot of GNOME/KDE distros like to use huge fonts.

I suspect it's because Linux's/X's/whatever font smoothing really sucks for small fonts, and the devs know this, and they're just covering it up by using big fonts.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Thunar
by negativity on Tue 18th Apr 2006 15:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Thunar"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

Fonts size:

I believe it's a change of perspective. When Windows was created, you would see definitions of 640x480, 800x600.

Nowadays, you will find definitions of 1600x1400 or more. Really, some guys use huge definitions.

If Linux sets the font sizes to the sizes of the fonts of Windows, it will be for backward compatibility with what was standard years or decades ago.

Also, Linux snobs in this regard, due to the support of layout managers in the GUIs of Linux. So one can increase/decrease the font size as much as ones likes it.

I generally dislike the fonts on Windows and KDE.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Thunar
by Tom K on Tue 18th Apr 2006 18:53 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Thunar"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

The average resolution now seems to be 1024x768, and such fonts are simply too big for that resolution.

And there is no easy way to change the default font size in GTK+ applications system-wide. You have to create a config file that you stick somewhere in /usr/lib that over-rides the font sizes. Stupid, stupid design.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Thunar
by negativity on Tue 18th Apr 2006 19:25 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Thunar"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

Windows is so old that if we digged in it we could find petroleum. :-)

Joking. :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Thunar
by JMcCarthy on Tue 18th Apr 2006 20:01 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Thunar"
JMcCarthy Member since:
2005-08-12

"And there is no easy way to change the default font size in GTK+ applications system-wide. You have to create a config file that you stick somewhere in /usr/lib that over-rides the font sizes."

wroooooooooooooong.

"The average resolution now seems to be 1024x768, and such fonts are simply too big for that resolution"

The fonts are entirely resonable. They're Sans 10 by default. The problem is gargantuan toolbars & icons. Which is easily fixed.

Edited 2006-04-18 20:06

Reply Score: 1

RE: Thunar
by bogomipz on Tue 18th Apr 2006 07:53 UTC in reply to "Thunar"
bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

Those are not tabs, but the path to your current directory.

I'm very much looking forward to the final 4.4 release, thunar needs to be unleashed to the world ;o)

Reply Score: 1

Wicked
by Innova on Mon 17th Apr 2006 23:41 UTC
Innova
Member since:
2005-09-30

This is my favourite light-weight DE. I still am partial to Gnome when I have the resources. But, this with Nautilus as a WM works like a charm.

But, my 700 MhZ Duron flies with XFce, use it with Rox for a desktop and Filemanager and I'm in heaven. My slower box runs as a file/print server for home. Usually just runs in runlevel 3. But, now and then, I love to just log into it with XFce and show mt friends how fast old hardware can feel compared to their screaming rigs with XP.

The approach these guys take to the desktop environment is terrific. I'll have to install this tonight and see how it runs ;)

Reply Score: 1

Taskbar
by zizban on Mon 17th Apr 2006 23:44 UTC
zizban
Member since:
2005-07-06

The iconbox and taskbar are currently being subsumed inside this new panel framework, and will become instances of the panel, increasing flexibility, and reducing the effort to maintain the bunch.

Whew, I certainly detest the taskbar; I think its ugly and it takes up screen space. I can't wait to be able to disable it completely.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Taskbar
by bogomipz on Tue 18th Apr 2006 08:00 UTC in reply to "Taskbar"
bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

Yeah, it's great that the taskbar and Lil' Star get merged with the panel. I never liked the fact that they were seperate programs. The old panel and taskbar have too much overlapping functionality.

Reply Score: 1

Impressive software
by Dave_K on Tue 18th Apr 2006 00:43 UTC
Dave_K
Member since:
2005-11-16

It's not enough to get me to switch from Windows, but the combination of speed and usability in XFCE is definitely impressive.

With a decent file manager integrated I think it easily competes with GNOME and KDE. I can't understand why they are so much more popular considering their relative bloat and how mature XFCE is becoming. It's definitely a DE that people should watch closely and I think the developers of other DEs could learn from it.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Impressive software
by Ookaze on Tue 18th Apr 2006 14:16 UTC in reply to "Impressive software"
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

the combination of speed and usability in XFCE is definitely impressive

I don't find it impressive at all, so it's not definitely anything.
At least, it served to put to rest people who say X is slow.

With a decent file manager integrated I think it easily competes with GNOME and KDE

You got to be kidding. If you mean as a DE, I think you don't realise the big difference between Xfce and KDE/Gnome.
GConf, Gnome-VFS and all are not there just to add bloat you know, and yes, they improve the experience a great deal.

I can't understand why they are so much more popular considering their relative bloat and how mature XFCE is becoming

I can understand pretty well, as I use it often, specifically for root (yes, I actually have a graphical root) as it is lightweight, along with Gnome and KDE.
You say XFCE is only becoming mature, and I think the other DE are already mature. I even think XFCE is mature since a long time.
But it's a different beast. It's more like a CDE made right.
Think about an average end user to see the difference. XFCE still do not have a decent file manager in a stable released. XFFM is plain unusable.
Even I had a hard time using it.

It's definitely a DE that people should watch closely and I think the developers of other DEs could learn from it

Like always, people don't need your advice, as people have already thought of that, and people have already done that.
You'll notice that some part of Nautilus are similar to Thunar, and no, that's no accident.
The latest Gnome starts faster than XFCE on my machine now, with far more things to load on the Gnome side.
That was not the case with the previous version of GTK+ and Gnome.
Perhaps it would be different on a machine with low memory and slow processor.

Reply Score: 1

Well done
by da_Chicken on Tue 18th Apr 2006 01:24 UTC
da_Chicken
Member since:
2006-01-01

I just compiled the new Xfce 4.4 beta on Debian. This is easily going to be the best Xfce release so far. Xfce looks just as good as Gnome (no, actually Xfce looks even better ;) and it's more configurable than Gnome. New themes look great.

But what happened to the panel drawers that Xfce used to have? I'd like to add a panel drawer that pops up a list of my favourite games but this doesn't seem to be possible anymore. Also, I'd like the Xfce calendar to pop up when I click the panel clock. Is it possible to configure the panel clock to do this?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Well done
by mr_scary on Tue 18th Apr 2006 23:27 UTC in reply to "Well done"
mr_scary Member since:
2006-04-18

I installed Xubuntu (Ubuntu + XFCE) last week. The calendar plugin comes pre-installed and its icon shows up on the Panel by default. A single click on it brings it up and a second click (on the icon) brings it down.

Reply Score: 1

hmm, can't do something essential...
by sledgehammer89 on Tue 18th Apr 2006 03:05 UTC
sledgehammer89
Member since:
2006-02-02

- doesn't have a usual context menu on top of desktop icons
- doesn't choose more than one icon on desktop icons for (example) deleting 1+x desktop icons
- the feeling of desktop icon handling and position is a bit ugly
- can't right click on the desktop and create some new desktop icons (program starters, new directories, ...)
- trashcan?
- VFS? You can't bring a plugins to XFCE to browse into archives, usb devices, but forget everything else (ftp, ssh, sftp, nfs, smb, ncpfs, local iso and encrypted iso files/-dirs) and doesn't have an application for do something with usb scanners, digicams, ... I have integrated pmount, fuse AND ivman for doing a lot of this things above, but I haven't that experience to program ;)

sorry, it's not that handling what users expect. it looks like a hack ("we have it too") but it's not very useful (now).

Reply Score: 1

Domin Member since:
2005-07-10

Maybe Xubuntu guys will come to help with integration...

Reply Score: 3

Ronald Vos Member since:
2005-07-06

sorry, it's not that handling what users expect. it looks like a hack ("we have it too") but it's not very useful (now).

That's allright, putting stuff on the desktop isn't very useful and a bad habit anyway ;)

Reply Score: 2

Thought it was dead
by ParanoidAndroid on Tue 18th Apr 2006 07:37 UTC
ParanoidAndroid
Member since:
2006-03-26

Xfce was alway pretty good but I thought it was dead! Thunar seems promising

Reply Score: 1

Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?
by nighty5 on Tue 18th Apr 2006 08:38 UTC
nighty5
Member since:
2005-12-18

Anybody successful in getting this build working with Dapper Drake out of interest?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?
by da_Chicken on Tue 18th Apr 2006 10:41 UTC in reply to "Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?"
da_Chicken Member since:
2006-01-01

Anybody successful in getting this build working with Dapper Drake out of interest?

You could try what I did on Debian:
-- add your user to the "staff" group (so you can install stuff to /usr/local as a normal user)
-- install the "build-essential" package
-- add the "deb-src" repository line to /etc/apt/sources.list and run "sudo apt-get update"
-- install build dependencies (sudo apt-get build-dep xfdesktop4 xfce4-terminal xfprint4 alsa-utils)
-- download the Xfce GUI-installer (for example, to ~/tmp/xfce)
-- run the Xfce GUI-installer (sh ~/tmp/xfce/xfce4-4.3.90.1-installer.bin)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?
by nighty5 on Tue 18th Apr 2006 11:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?"
nighty5 Member since:
2005-12-18

Thankyou da_chicken, your instructions seem very reasonable to me. I will give it a shot ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?
by da_Chicken on Tue 18th Apr 2006 12:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?"
da_Chicken Member since:
2006-01-01

I forgot to mention one package that you'll also need to install: pkg-config

I'd have edited my original post but OSNews doesn't allow editing your own posts after 20 minutes. And you cannot even reply to your own post because there's only "Edit" option (that's totally useless after 20 mins) available. ;)

Reply Score: 1

Reply/Edit
by KenJackson on Tue 18th Apr 2006 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

...you cannot even reply to your own post because there's only "Edit" option...

I don't understand why OS News presents different user interfaces to different people. I can reply to myself, but have never had the option to edit.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Reply/Edit
by KenJackson on Tue 18th Apr 2006 18:43 UTC in reply to "Reply/Edit"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

See?

Reply Score: 1

OT
by TezKAh on Thu 20th Apr 2006 07:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Reply/Edit"
TezKAh Member since:
2005-07-06

click on the little infinity (or chain?) symbol on the lower left hand side of the post, this is where you can choose edit (but reply is hidden).


from the main comment tree i always see reply, even to my own comments.

editing... of course, this story hides my comment because it is nested two comments deep from threaded view. On other stories, i see the reply option from the main threaded view, and reply from the link. but yes, it is annoying.

Edited 2006-04-20 07:30

Reply Score: 1

RE: Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?
by mr_scary on Tue 18th Apr 2006 23:37 UTC in reply to "Ubuntu - Dapper Drake?"
mr_scary Member since:
2006-04-18

I installed Xubuntu last week on my old thinkpad (390x) by iso/CD. No problems except that clicking on a menu entry does nothing at all. The entry is called "Software Properties" and it was brought to my attention when I first clicked on "Update Manager". Like in order to update I had to configure my system via "Software Properties". Although just now I tried again and it updated 6 packages without error.

Reply Score: 1

v YAWM
by flobberchops on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:00 UTC
RE: YAWM
by thebluesgnr on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:15 UTC in reply to "YAWM"
thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14

Xfce is not a window manager. In fact, if you like you can run GNOME's window manager (metacity) with it.

Reply Score: 1

v Desktop metaphor
by flobberchops on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:02 UTC
RE: Desktop metaphor
by thebluesgnr on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:16 UTC in reply to "Desktop metaphor"
thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14

There's a lot of innovation in free software projects. If you don't like the desktop metaphor used in all major desktop environments available today you can come up with your own suggestions.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Desktop metaphor
by flobberchops on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Desktop metaphor"
flobberchops Member since:
2006-04-18

Innovation on free software projects? Can you please give some that are in widespread use today on the desktop?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Desktop metaphor
by negativity on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Desktop metaphor"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

Xfce is pretty innovative, in the sense of "give me the minimum desktop that I need to use my computer, which supports skins, and I will shut up".

Xfce 4.4 that is.

But, if you want to play games with your computer, literally, use Windows Vista. Windows XP was innovative in any sense?

By the way, when you want to create a building, you start with the floor, then the second floor, then the third, etc. Ask Microsoft about that. Apple always had the shiny toys, but Microsoft built useful enough tools. If Microsoft can focus on the playful features of Windows Vista, it's because they had to build the initial floors first and foremost.

Linux doesn't need your help, by the way. You children or grandchildren will enjoy it for you.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Desktop metaphor
by h times nue equals e on Tue 18th Apr 2006 10:25 UTC in reply to "Desktop metaphor"
h times nue equals e Member since:
2006-01-21

Actually, I've used a desktop-like-environment with vertical alignment just a few minutes ago. It's called "blackboard" and the technology behind it isn't all that new, perhaps you stumbled across it already somewhere.

On a more seriously attempt to answer your post :

Do something completly different (Ion, Ratpoison, ... ) and people will tell you, it's too different from what folks already know, so nobody despite the geeks in their parents cellars, who have no work to get done, will use it (which isn't true, but that doesn't help to stop this argument)

Use established concepts and give it a spin in the direction you (as a developer / project group) like, and you will get told, that things like this have been around for ages, so it isn't inovative at all and therefore nobody will use it, because they can stick to what they know too.

Work in an environment, that provides solutions that follow both of aboves paradigmas, and you will get told that the over-diversification of DE's/WM/tools will prevent your environment and FOSS in general from "beeing ready for the desktop".

There is (IMHO, and judging from my experience) no such thing as a magic "inovate" button you simply press, making truly innovative software/products/whatever almost always involves a little thinking-outside-the-box, which is easier to achieve, if you are not restricted what you *can* do, even if your innovations are only little variations of already established concepts, they might have their value too. But if you have some good ideas, that would allow drastic UI improvements / innovations, nothing hinders you from participating in a project or starting your own project to bring your visions to fruit (well, nothing should hinder you, beside the fear of a too large number of WM/DE's that seems to plague you).

No offense meant

Regards

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: one thing missing: audio
by Terracotta on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:07 UTC
Terracotta
Member since:
2005-08-15

Yeah I tried it, but it doesn't have a database, and using just a playlist can be quite annoying, and is a lot of work.

Reply Score: 1

Reboot/shutdown
by lezard on Tue 18th Apr 2006 09:13 UTC
lezard
Member since:
2005-10-11

Anyone knows if they got rid of the sudo mechanism for reboot/shutdown ? I never understood why you should put your password to shut down your own personal PC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Reboot/shutdown
by dr_gonzo on Tue 18th Apr 2006 10:06 UTC in reply to "Reboot/shutdown"
dr_gonzo Member since:
2005-07-06

You can setup sudo so that it can run specific commands for users/groups as root without prompting for a password. You could change the permissions on /sbin/halt so that normal users can use it.

Most 'proper' desktop distros don't require you to give your password to shut the computer down.

Reply Score: 1

Wallpaper
by Worldbuilder on Tue 18th Apr 2006 10:16 UTC
Worldbuilder
Member since:
2006-04-12

Anyone knows where to get that wallpaper from the last picture featured on the thunar user screenshots page?

Edited 2006-04-18 10:17

Reply Score: 1

I'm sorry but...
by Haicube on Tue 18th Apr 2006 10:58 UTC
Haicube
Member since:
2005-08-06

XFCE, which is obviously light weight as far as I understand, but I really don't get it somehow. One of the major changes is "Thunar" which will make XFCE more similar to all the other mainstream windowmanagers out there.

Can Innovators please stand up?

Reply Score: 1

RE: I'm sorry but...
by negativity on Tue 18th Apr 2006 11:48 UTC in reply to "I'm sorry but..."
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

The new Xfce Panel is one of the most flexible out there. I mean, of all the taskbars or panels that you know, like the Gnome ones, the KDE ones, IceWM's one, etc, I prefer the new one of Xfce 4.4. Maybe one of the differences is that the Xfce Panel always supported a submenu for the "quick launch" icons, which I find is pretty rare among the Panels. Also, it's possible to have any number of Panels that you like. For example, you can use on the top filled with "quick launch" icons, and one on the bottom with the "taskbar". It's really flexible, for example, I use two monitors, and I can use one different Panel on each monitor easily. Also, the Panel is configurable enough, and it will only get better with more plugins and whatnot.

For those that don't know Xfce well, it uses GTK+, which means that it integrates really well with other GTK+ applications, just like Gnome does. Xfce and Gnome share the same skins, as well.

The Window Manager of Xfce 4.4 supports icons on the windows, and it generally feels really great when compared to other Window Managers. I mean, we won't ever have everybody agree on anything, universally, but as long as you have an usable approach it should be fine, and for that reason I think Metacity (Gnome's) is fine as well.

I like the Terminal as well. I'm so used to it, that maybe I would find the one of Gnome strange if I had to use it.

Thunar is awesome. I prefer it to Nautilus.

As I said, Xfce 4.4 provides me with a desktop good enough that I simply don't see the need to use anything else. I know it can improve even more, but the Xfce developers need help with that. The core Xfce developers are few in number, but are great at implementation of good ideas.

For instance, before Ubuntu, Gnome was having a bad time because it was hard to install it. Even the Slackware creator complained about Gnome, remember? But after Ubuntu, Gnome become more prominent. The same thing could happen to Xfce, not that it isn't already, but if a major distro adopts it, it could improve really fast. Ubuntu will provide Xubuntu, a version with Xfce. Let's hope that it will be one of the several that will help Xfce in providing the best lightweight Linux desktop for users.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: I'm sorry but...
by Ookaze on Tue 18th Apr 2006 14:55 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm sorry but..."
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

The Window Manager of Xfce 4.4 supports icons on the windows, and it generally feels really great when compared to other Window Managers

But does it support device icons management ? What does feel great now ?
The XFCE file manager was full of bugs making some XFCE app annoying at times. Also, sessions were implemented late, and in the current stable, have design bugs.
Like the session being dependant on the virtual terminal you launch your desktop on, for the same user.

I like the Terminal as well. I'm so used to it, that maybe I would find the one of Gnome strange if I had to use it

They have implemented a terminal ? Because in the stable version I use, Terminal is just a redecoration of one terminal implementation on the system.
At home, it is a redeceoration of xterm. And I have no problem switching between xterm and gnome-terminal (this was not true before Gnome 2.14).

Thunar is awesome. I prefer it to Nautilus

I'm sure to try Thunar when XFCE 4.4 is out, but from what I've seen during Gnome development, where they talked about Thunar, there is not much to see.

The core Xfce developers are few in number, but are great at implementation of good ideas

That's true. But now it shows. Gnome has closed the gaps in the few areas where XFCE had the lead.

For instance, before Ubuntu, Gnome was having a bad time because it was hard to install it

It was not. But some people love flame wars. Actually, it was easier to install then, than it is now.

Even the Slackware creator complained about Gnome, remember?

He's far from being a reference ...

But after Ubuntu, Gnome become more prominent. The same thing could happen to Xfce, not that it isn't already, but if a major distro adopts it, it could improve really fast

You seem to imply that XFCE 4.4 is at the same level as Gnome/KDE. I have high doubts about that, but I'll know soon enough.
I have high doubts, because Gnome has a lot of framework on which Gnome apps rely, that are not available in XFCE.

Ubuntu will provide Xubuntu, a version with Xfce. Let's hope that it will be one of the several that will help Xfce in providing the best lightweight Linux desktop for users

But lightweight Linux desktops are not what is selling, so I doubt major distro will put it as their main desktop.
XFCE is lightweight with few dependancies, it takes less than an hour to compile on my PC while the other DE need 10+ hours, that's why that's the sole DE I put on my Live CD. It also can run with a little memory.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'm sorry but...
by negativity on Tue 18th Apr 2006 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'm sorry but..."
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

"But does it support device icons management ? What does feel great now ?"

I believe that a good desktop distro can put together an user friendly Xfce, which device drivers. Just need some script to do that I think. Once they have a good one maybe the Xfce developers could incorporate it in their code.

"The XFCE file manager was full of bugs making some XFCE app annoying at times. Also, sessions were implemented late, and in the current stable, have design bugs."

Well, I never really used Xfce before the 4.3 versions. But I have been using it for several months and I use Thunar/Terminal for file management since then. Thunar is turning out really nice. I love it.

"Like the session being dependant on the virtual terminal you launch your desktop on, for the same user."

I don't know about this, sorry.

"They have implemented a terminal ? Because in the stable version I use, Terminal is just a redecoration of one terminal implementation on the system.
At home, it is a redeceoration of xterm. And I have no problem switching between xterm and gnome-terminal (this was not true before Gnome 2.14). "

They have a new Terminal as well. It's now the default one. I have been using it and it supports tabs just fine, also it's plenty configurable.

"I'm sure to try Thunar when XFCE 4.4 is out, but from what I've seen during Gnome development, where they talked about Thunar, there is not much to see."

Thunar is humbly trying to solve one problem at a time. The Xfce family of tools try to be lightweight in implementation; for example, they don't want to depend on all the Gnome libraries.

"That's true. But now it shows. Gnome has closed the gaps in the few areas where XFCE had the lead."

I appreciate the work of the Gnome folks. But nowadays when I install Ubuntu I just can't stand Gnome when I compare it to Xfce 4.4. For starters, I hate the two panels of Gnome. It's even worse with two monitors, because then I have four panels in Gnome, and I have to drag the mouse up and down trying to click on things. With Xfce I just have 1 panel per monitor, and they are fully functional just as if I had the Gnome panels.

"It was not. But some people love flame wars. Actually, it was easier to install then, than it is now. "

If you say so.

"He's far from being a reference ..."

We just aren't perfect, are we? :-)

"You seem to imply that XFCE 4.4 is at the same level as Gnome/KDE. I have high doubts about that, but I'll know soon enough.
I have high doubts, because Gnome has a lot of framework on which Gnome apps rely, that are not available in XFCE. "

That's relevant, indeed. But I could never stand KDE, and after Xfce 4.4, I just can't stand Gnome. Maybe more people will appreciate Xfce 4.4, just like me. Let's give them some opportunity. Let's improve Xfce even more as well.

"But lightweight Linux desktops are not what is selling, so I doubt major distro will put it as their main desktop. "

I agree. KDE is fun. Gnome is work. Xfce is joy.

"XFCE is lightweight with few dependancies, it takes less than an hour to compile on my PC while the other DE need 10+ hours, that's why that's the sole DE I put on my Live CD. It also can run with a little memory."

Big plus for Xfce. When people have fast round trips of edit/compile/test, they can develop faster as well. Xfce wins big time in this regard.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'm sorry but...
by lezard on Tue 18th Apr 2006 15:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'm sorry but..."
lezard Member since:
2005-10-11

device icons management -> yes it does. For the rest, did you understand that they dropped the old file manager to a new one ?

They have implemented a terminal ? Because in the stable version I use, Terminal is just a redecoration of one terminal implementation on the system. -> I don't get your point, isn't that just great that they don't want to recreate everything from scratch ?

I'm sure to try Thunar when XFCE 4.4 is out, but from what I've seen during Gnome development, where they talked about Thunar, there is not much to see. -> Just name one reason to use Nautilus over Thunar

He's far from being a reference -> not a reference ? Even I, who don't really like his opinion and never liked Slackware, consider him as a reference in the GNU/Linux world.

You're trying to imply that GNOME is close to XFCE, and I really wonder why you're saying that. Coming from a KDE fan, I can trully say that XFCE is a great alternative. In fact, I tend to switch between XFCE and KDE all the time. It is a bit like "GNOME done right".

Reply Score: 1

Memroy usage
by SlackerJack on Tue 18th Apr 2006 12:39 UTC
SlackerJack
Member since:
2005-11-12

Well I just tried Xfce4.4 and it's alot better especially with Thunar, xfce previous filemanagr was aweful. According to my memory stats it takes about 80Mb ram plus 10Mb for Thunar.

GNOME-2.14.1 takes about the same memory and nautilus starts up just as quick as Thunar. I better Xfce4.4 will be faster on a lower end system but cannot think why since the stats are the same.

Thunar is nice but it is very Nautilus like with some fuctionallity stripped out yet almost identical. Good job anyway.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Memroy usage
by negativity on Tue 18th Apr 2006 12:45 UTC in reply to "Memroy usage"
negativity Member since:
2006-02-23

You bring up performance issues which is generally a source of contradictions.

Without the how, where, and data, it generally is futile.

On top of that, to detect memory use on Linux is really controversial. Some people sometimes would use FreeBSD for that, but it seems that one of the newest kernels of Linux has better support for memory use detection.

Nice job.

Reply Score: 1

perfomance
by Tom Janowitz on Tue 18th Apr 2006 14:41 UTC
Tom Janowitz
Member since:
2005-12-05

From what I see much of the difference comes from ultra fast themes. I installed it (XFCE-beta) and now using one of those themes under gnome - this _makes_ a big difference. With all clearlooks style themes lagging behind I thing I'm impressed how relatively little is required to change perceived responsiveness of the gui - thunderbird, right click context menu and menu itself - all act a lot faster...
As to the memory footprint - it look's like bare install of xfce4-4.3.90.1 takes some 40MB less than gnome. One can judge for himself what to choose - smaller memory usage or the more mature desktop env. Since even small apps. today eat up easily this 40 MB I don't give a damn. But for really low end systems this can be a boon.

Reply Score: 1

Angel--Fr@gzill@
Member since:
2005-12-23

!!!

Some people were asking why "Xfce" is not more popular and is not the default Desktop environment of more distros...

Well, considering how good is it already and the pace of development, it will be much more popular in the near future. That is sure!

In between, apart from Zenwalk Linux and Wolvix, that are more or less well known, I know a couple of Distros, at least, that use "Xfce" as default Desktop: Kwort Linux, Dreamlinux, SAM Linux, and Kate OS 2.1...

None of them is updted to Xfce 4.4-beta 1 yet, of course, but It won't be too difficult to do, if you want to. Anyway, they are updated quickly to the latest XFCE versions in their releases generally.


I have tried them and they are already very useful, stable, snappy, and very nice looking:


- Kwort Linux ( http://kwort.org/index.php?body=gallery&type=screenshots )

- Dreamlinux ( http://www.dreamlinux.com.br/english/index.html )

- SAM Linux ( http://www.sam-linux.org/ )

- Wolvix 1.0.4 GE ( http://wolvix.org/node/117 )

- Zenwalk Linux 2.4 ( http://www.zenwalk.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=9 )

- Kate OS 2.1 ( http://kateos.org/?sekcja=kateIIss )


I have 2 of them installed in 2 machines in my network.Give them a try. I can assure you that they are worthy to...


!!!

Reply Score: 1

IT IS A BETA!!!
by psyBSD on Tue 18th Apr 2006 17:10 UTC
psyBSD
Member since:
2006-04-18

A lot of people seem to forget that they are dealing with a pre-release here, a BETA version.

This means that speed, mem-usage and stability are supposed to be further improved, that is the whole idea of a BETA version!

BETA == Feature-complete (and that's all)

Developers can only test so much, and that is why they release BETA versions, so users can try it out and comment on stuff that needs improvement.

IMHO Flaming about the startup-time of a BETA release is a waste of energy.

Reply Score: 2

For lightweight, it's IceWM or Fluxbox for me
by JeffS on Tue 18th Apr 2006 17:52 UTC
JeffS
Member since:
2005-07-12

I like Xfce a lot. It looks great, and it's faster than Gnome or KDE. I've sung it praises in the past.

However, I'm finding that Xfce is kind of a "tweener" - it's somewhere in between a full DE and a window manager. It doesn't have the full functionality/features of a full DE like Gnome or KDE, and it's not as fast as a pure window manager type environment like IceWM or Fluxbox.

If I'm on modern, fast hardware, it's Gnome or KDE for me. If I'm on older, slower hardware, IceWM and Fluxbox are awesome.

IceWM, in particular, as really grown on my. It's super fast - the fastest I've tried, and it looks great and is fully themable, and is fully extensible.

Reply Score: 2

Mouseover effects in xfwm4?
by irbis on Tue 18th Apr 2006 18:12 UTC
irbis
Member since:
2005-07-08

Is it possible to have mouseover effects with Xfwm4 buttons like in Metacity/GNOME (so a window manager button changes looks when the cursor gets on it)? People seem to be used to such mouse over effects so it might be a nice addon feature to xfwm too if not yet possible?

Reply Score: 1

changelog
by spectator on Tue 18th Apr 2006 20:16 UTC
spectator
Member since:
2006-02-27

Haven't seen the official chcnagelog, but as I have used the svn version for some time already, noticed some nice improvements. Apart from thunar (which I find an excellent alternative for nautilus) there is a new terminal emulator, some window manager tweaks in the setting section, also in setting an easy way to set the startup programs. Also an important change is that xfdesktop allows icons. Loads of people waited for that afair.

As for multimedia, I only need something for music and my choice is mpd (unstable, I have lots of musepack files) + gmpc. It's very lightwieght, plays everything I want and fits in the de very well.

A good tag manager would make this combination perfect (I find easy tag... not easy ;)

Reply Score: 1