Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 24th Apr 2008 19:25 UTC
Window Managers Enlightenment 0.17, the big, long awaited new release of the Enlightenment project, has been in the making for a long time now - since December 2000, to be precise. E17, as it became known, is a complete rewrite of Enlightenment, complete with a set of base libraries (the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries) turning it into a full-fledged desktop environment, complete with its own set of base libraries for building applications. Last November, main developer Carsten 'Rasterman' Haitzler stated that there were only two big to-do items left blocking the release of E17. We're now a few months ahead, so I contacted Rasterman to see what's what.
Order by: Score:
Who will use it
by wigginz on Thu 24th Apr 2008 21:28 UTC
wigginz
Member since:
2006-03-03

Been waiting for E17 for a very long time, one of the first window managers I ever became comfortable with was E16 but it wasn't long before it was passed up by the other full desktops. I'm sure many will disagree, but I feel like with the work that's been thrown behind Gnome and KDE recently that E17 is losing it's relevancy. Maybe my idea of who the audience that E17 is targeting is out of date, anyone have any idea what that might be today?

Edited 2008-04-24 21:28 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Who will use it
by abraxas on Thu 24th Apr 2008 21:46 UTC in reply to "Who will use it"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

I'm sure many will disagree, but I feel like with the work that's been thrown behind Gnome and KDE recently that E17 is losing it's relevancy.

I agree. I think it's been so long coming that die-hard Enlightenment users have long since switched to other window managers or desktop environments. E17 is going to have to win over a whole new set of users. That means there is going to have to be some significant advantages over other environments in order for it to gain any mindshare in today's FOSS world. I guess the best thing E17 has going for it now is its relatively small footprint.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Who will use it
by panzi on Thu 24th Apr 2008 21:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Who will use it"
panzi Member since:
2006-01-22

I think it also has to support aiglx (be a compitz alternative) to get attention.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Who will use it
by rhyder on Fri 25th Apr 2008 20:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Who will use it"
rhyder Member since:
2005-09-28

Ironic really, as back in the old days, it was the high-end, bling-tastic desktop of choice for power users.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Who will use it
by _txf_ on Thu 24th Apr 2008 22:11 UTC in reply to "Who will use it"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

I used to use it 3 years ago (compiled from cvs), even back then it was quite stable. I stopped using it because it seemed to be going nowhere fast and after a while it was just easier to use gnome and kde.

I would say it is a good replacement for those who still use e16 and it is similarly lightweight in comparison to xfce (but prettier in my opinion).

I think though that they spent too much time faffing around with creating etk when they should have just used gtk and made an engine that is suited to e17. There aren't enough apps that use etk and so the desktop is inevitably going to use gtk and qt based apps.

It has taken too long but there is little they could do about it short of getting more people to work on it.

Edited 2008-04-24 22:13 UTC

Reply Score: 4

It doesn't matter how good it is...
by intangible on Thu 24th Apr 2008 21:47 UTC
intangible
Member since:
2005-07-06

It doesn't matter how good it is if it's never released.
Release early, release often, or fade into irrelevance.

Reply Score: 17

lenrek Member since:
2005-07-07

It doesn't matter how good it is if it's never released.
Release early, release often, or fade into irrelevance.


I used to be a diehard E16 user, now a GNOME (Dropline, to be precise) user, and I wholeheartedly agree with you. Judging from the scores you received so far, I know I am not the only one.

Reply Score: 1

pretty good
by Nex6 on Thu 24th Apr 2008 22:01 UTC
Nex6
Member since:
2005-07-06

E17, is very solid. and its not just a simple window manager, it is more of a window mgr framework. Its first class, and already very stable.

I have made some comments on E17 on my blog ( http://nex6.blogspot.com/ )

just search for E17,

-Nexus6

Reply Score: 2

Hmm...
by 1c3d0g on Thu 24th Apr 2008 22:24 UTC
1c3d0g
Member since:
2005-07-06

...although I respect Enlightenment as a DE (compared to the other bloated ones), I'd rather have Openbox as my WM. Speedy, lightweight and does what it's supposed to do, no more, no less. :-)

Reply Score: 1

the new theme...
by oneiros on Thu 24th Apr 2008 22:43 UTC
oneiros
Member since:
2007-08-12

is great! the bling theme is really inspiring and captivating to me, but I've been using the new theme by default for over a month. raster hosts it on his page.

http://www.rasterman.com/files/new.edj

enjoy fellow Eheads

Reply Score: 1

RE: the new theme...
by diegoviola on Fri 25th Apr 2008 01:17 UTC in reply to "the new theme..."
diegoviola Member since:
2006-08-15

Screenshot please? ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: the new theme...
by oneiros on Fri 25th Apr 2008 01:50 UTC in reply to "RE: the new theme..."
oneiros Member since:
2007-08-12

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p312/scottied16/newtheme.jpg

screenie of my lapytappy

e17 ftw

Edited 2008-04-25 01:50 UTC

Reply Score: 1

2000
by SoloDeveloper on Fri 25th Apr 2008 02:20 UTC
SoloDeveloper
Member since:
2008-03-16

I was using E17 back when you could have widgets all over the desktop, not just on the dock. I dont care for how your now locked in to have them just in the dock, but i will admit, even on my older 700MHz PC with only 256 MB Ram, I run Ubuntu with E17 as the default, and it does run pretty swiftly.

Reply Score: 1

RE: 2000
by Bending Unit on Fri 25th Apr 2008 05:18 UTC in reply to "2000"
Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

Swiftly compared to what?

I recently used Ubuntu on a 1GHz with ~700MB RAM and that wasn't very funny. Productivity really suffered mostly because of the GTK UI itself. Even typing was lagging in applications like Eclipse.

Now I use a 1.6GHz P4 at "work" with 1.2GB RAM and while it's a bit better, it's still quite slow, especially browning with Firefox. Also the System Monitor takes up 30% CPU by itself making it unusable.

Both computers run Windows 2000 without seeming slow.

But I have experienced this for years with a whole lot of old computers so it's nothing new.

Something is fundamentally damaged within the X, GTK or whatever code or design that slows Linux computers down tremendously (for GUI work).

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: 2000
by Soulbender on Fri 25th Apr 2008 05:36 UTC in reply to "RE: 2000"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Something is fundamentally damaged within the X, GTK or whatever code or design that slows Linux computers down tremendously (for GUI work).


Or perhaps something is fundamentally damaged with your computing skills. Running Ubuntu on a 1.3Ghz laptop with 512Mb is quite swift (I'm using it right at this moment) and even more so on a 1.6Ghz C2D with 1Gb.
Not that Windows is slower, it's pretty much the same speed-wise with XP although Vista is certainly more sluggish.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: 2000
by DeadFishMan on Fri 25th Apr 2008 12:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 2000"
DeadFishMan Member since:
2006-01-09

"Something is fundamentally damaged within the X, GTK or whatever code or design that slows Linux computers down tremendously (for GUI work).


Or perhaps something is fundamentally damaged with your computing skills. Running Ubuntu on a 1.3Ghz laptop with 512Mb is quite swift (I'm using it right at this moment) and even more so on a 1.6Ghz C2D with 1Gb.
Not that Windows is slower, it's pretty much the same speed-wise with XP although Vista is certainly more sluggish.
"

Nope. I have been getting the same performance issues that the grand poster describes with GNOME on older machines and I have been saying this for years: GNOME and GTK+ are both really slow compared to most other DEs and toolkits and the fact that X isn't exactly a speed demon either does not help it. Ubuntu is slightly slower than some GNOME distros, though (with the possible exception of OpenSUSE). It could be some background service/daemon or some such, but it is definitely slower than even Fedora.

I'll concede that it is less of an issue on anything faster than 1Ghz and that the video driver will certainly affect your perception of speed on the GUI side of things but if performance is a concern, you're better off with other distros such as Slackware or Debian proper.

But hey - I am getting used to it already: go ahead and tell me that there is something wrong with my setup and that Ubuntu is most likely the fastest distro on the planet (and the best that there is, while we're at it!) ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 2000
by renox on Fri 25th Apr 2008 07:29 UTC in reply to "RE: 2000"
renox Member since:
2005-07-06

Swiftly compared to what?
[cut]
Something is fundamentally damaged within the X, GTK or whatever code or design that slows Linux computers down tremendously (for GUI work).

Uh?
Why should it be the lower level library?

Me I tend to think that it's caused by lack of multithreading, but this isn't a lower level library issue more an application design issue..

[ I'm running Linux at work, Windows XP at home, *both* sucks in responsiveness compared to what BeOS provided quite a few years ago ]

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 2000
by karl on Sat 26th Apr 2008 12:19 UTC in reply to "RE: 2000"
karl Member since:
2005-07-06

You, my friend, ran into a rather serious bug in GNOME System Monitor-and btw it has already been fixed.

http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=507797

The guys working on that software decided to make some really nice snazzy graphics for displaying system information-unfortunately these graphics brought most machines to their knees.

This has now been fixed,probably not perfect yet-but significantly less CPU usage, and most distros should be offering an update.

It still sucks that when programmers use the prefered API's to make nice graphics, that these API's are only as good as the driver support. In this case cairo was used to create the snazzy graphics and cairo uses RENDER, which unfortunately is not very well supported by many graphics card drivers...

But this bug, at least, has been redressed.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: 2000
by WereCatf on Sat 26th Apr 2008 12:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 2000"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

In this case cairo was used to create the snazzy graphics and cairo uses RENDER,

That is one of the things I don't quite understand. OpenGL is REALLY well supported under Linux, it is a lot faster than RENDER and Cairo does support it via glitz...But still no one uses it. Why? It should be quite trivial to make f.ex. a control center applet that checks if OpenGL is enabled and allows you to test if Cairo with glitz works properly and then sets a gconf setting that globally enables or disables that. Would provide a nice performance boost..

Reply Score: 2

Eet ?
by rockmen1 on Fri 25th Apr 2008 03:12 UTC
rockmen1
Member since:
2006-02-04

The description remind me of one of the KDE4 feature paln long time ago. There was a plan that integrate small configuration files into one big one to improve performance. Can KDE developper use Eet to archive this?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Eet ?
by stestagg on Fri 25th Apr 2008 08:47 UTC in reply to "Eet ?"
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

It's called a registry, and experience says it's generally a bad idea.

Reply Score: 5

They always had the best name of all WMs...
by zima on Fri 25th Apr 2008 11:29 UTC
zima
Member since:
2005-07-06

At least that was my impression when I first heard about it ~10 years ago. "Enlightenment", not only nice looking/etc., also the name has "deep meaning" or something ;)

Too bad I'm not sure why I'd use it today...perhaps on OLPC XO-like machine, instead of XFce? But it would have to be faster (is it?) - somehow I doubt it's on par with XFce feature-wise, and if I'd settle on using something more minimalistic, I might as well go with _really_ light WMs...

Reply Score: 1