Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 24th Apr 2014 23:06 UTC, submitted by sheokand
PC-BSD

The PC-BSD project is developing its own desktop environment from scratch! The ultimate plan is for Lumina to become a full-featured, open-source desktop environment that may ultimately replace KDE as its default desktop environment.

A Phoronix reader, Ryan Bram, wrote in to share word on this new desktop environment being developed by the PC-BSD crew, the popular desktop-focused derivative of FreeBSD. This new desktop is called Lumina and is being developed as a home-grown desktop environment catered toward this BSD operating system.

While it's obviously cool, I wonder if it's a wise idea to undertake such a huge endeavour. I honestly doubt PC-BSD has the developers, testers, and users required for creating, maintaining, and improving an entire desktop environment.

Thread beginning with comment 587510
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Very strange way to use resources...
by Auzy on Fri 25th Apr 2014 00:29 UTC
Auzy
Member since:
2008-01-20

I hate to be "that guy", however, it seems a bit silly to develop a whole new desktop environment at this time when there are more pressing matters, especially since the choices of DE's these days isn't the problem.

If they need some guidance, just a quick list:
1) We don't have anything like Adobe creative Suite.
2) All DE's seem to be missing some basic but common GUI based Setting (Yast comes close though, but OpenSUSE, has some other issues).
3) There seems to be serious performance issues with most DE's, distros and gaming (Gnome 3 is the only modern DE I could find at the moment, which works at native frame-rate speeds)
4) Even Bitwig on Windows took 2 clicks to get going, but, on Linux, getting realtime audio running is a WHOLE other story.. Last I tried on BSD, my audio didn't work at all (but it might be different with my new sound interface now).


What's holding back Linux or BSD isn't the desktop environment (I haven't heard anyone complain about the interface). What's holding us back is the small stuff which we are missing, the small pieces lacking integration and professional applications (for audio, we now have bitwig, but we don't have anything for design).

If even 1 distro, instead of working on a new DE worked on a free, well-integrated Adobe Creative Suite alternative, it would do FAR more for their cash influx/donations, and for the global *nix environment than saturating the environment with another DE.

Reply Score: 8

leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Open source projects are not like a company where you can direct resources to anything you want. Whoever the authors are of this new DE, there is no way you would ever be able to tell them to write an Adobe CS competitor instead.

That said, why not Razor-Qt? http://razor-qt.org
Lightweight, Qt based, and already a lot of the groundwork is in place.

Reply Parent Score: 9

nicubunu Member since:
2014-01-08

You seems to confuse "Open Source" with "community developed", there are a lot of Open Source projects where the key, or even the most, developers are hired by one or more companies.
Of course a company can hire people to work on a FOSS project and tell them what to work on.

Reply Parent Score: 3

stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

Razor is merging into lxde as they're dropping gtk.

Reply Parent Score: 4

shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Razor-qt is being merged with LXDE: http://wiki.lxde.org/en/Merge_LXDE-Qt_and_Razor-Qt

Edited 2014-04-25 12:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

What's holding back Linux or BSD isn't the desktop environment (I haven't heard anyone complain about the interface).


Umm, that's exactly what you did, in two out of four talking points:

2) All DE's seem to be missing some basic but common GUI based Setting (Yast comes close though, but OpenSUSE, has some other issues).
3) There seems to be serious performance issues with most DE's, distros and gaming (Gnome 3 is the only modern DE I could find at the moment, which works at native frame-rate speeds)



Anyway, I'm not saying you're wrong, especially on your third point; I find OpenBox to be the most usable WM by far, and it's one of the most basic. Even on my beast of a workstation, Gnome and KDE are slow, and the latter is just way too complicated for my taste. But that's all personal issues.

Objectively speaking (as much as is possible on a subject like this) I think it makes sense for a BSD provider to roll their own DE that isn't a GNU/Linux port. A native DE that is licensed under BSD rather than GNU GPL, and developed by a BSD team, would be a better fit from both technical and philosophical standpoints.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Auzy Member since:
2008-01-20

What I meant was the interface layout, the actual Design, since from a user perspective, that would be the main reason why you would start a new project.

We have a history of constantly making major changes to the existing GUI's, but then major options go missing in the major updates (which is why its never 100%).

Open source developers can choose to do what they want, but, I'd be hesitant to donate to PC-BSD, if they don't choose to instead improve existing solutions. This is simply more fragmentation, which will be a subset of existing solutions (rather than fixing the remaining problems with the existing ones)...

Edited 2014-04-25 03:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

Funny how as the years have gone by, the "we don't have" has turned ever more esoteric.

Reply Parent Score: 3

areimann Member since:
2006-06-12

I think you are spot on! The desktops are great, the integration is lacking. I can get 90% of my work done with a text editor (plenty of them out there) and a browser, but to make my work sing, I needed support for that last 10%.

Reply Parent Score: 2