Home > Desktop environments > XPde Team Releases XPde 0.4.0 XPde Team Releases XPde 0.4.0 Submitted by José León Serna 2003-08-01 Desktop environments 65 Comments The XPde Team released XPde 0.4.0, a major upgrade to the XPde desktop environment and window manager. Check out the announcement, view the screenshots or read the detailed ChangeLog. Go to the downloads section to get the binaries and sources. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 65 Comments 2003-08-01 6:25 pm Anonymous I remember when this project was just getting off the ground. It looked very promising. It’s good to see they have made great progress in developing a windowing enviroment that mimics Windows 2000/XP. It will be great for users who want to learn Linux but are intimidated by a new GUI interface and OS. Keep it up! – J 2003-08-01 6:25 pm Anonymous Ewww, who needs this… Victor. 2003-08-01 6:25 pm Anonymous Oh boy! A window manager that mimics Windows! In my opinion, windows has the worst looking GUI out of any OS. Why not try to duplicate OS X’s interface? 2003-08-01 6:30 pm Anonymous Read previous discussions on this, it is a good and necessary project IMHO. http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3048 2003-08-01 6:31 pm Anonymous …would be nice. 2003-08-01 6:40 pm Anonymous This is definitely a great project that has made a lot of important progress. Why is a clone of the MacOS X interface any better than a clone of the Windows interface? No offence, but Linux isn’t gonna get too many users from Mac OS X, however, on the Windows side of things…that’s another story. And when Windows users try Linux, they’re going to want something that’s similar to what they are used to. I think this is a great sort of Linux “training wheels” project. Also, a combination of this, and a few other major apps such as OpenOffice and Mozilla FireBird/Thunderbird with FreeBSD 5.x or Linux would make a very nice consumer OS IMHO. 2003-08-01 6:42 pm Anonymous Yes, that’s your opinion that Windows has the worst looking GUI. But maybe if you’d actually visited their site and read the mission statement, you’d realise they are making this for Windows XP users, so they don’t have to go through the trouble of learning a new interface when switching. 2003-08-01 6:46 pm Anonymous Quote from the mentioned text: (…) when you want users to switch from a mainstream product to an alternative solution, each difference you have from the original drives away half of your potential users. (…) After the usability, behavior, shortcuts, look and feel etc. can be made identical to Windows, all it remains is having WINE to run well along the rest of native Linux apps I mean… if you want Windows look, Windows applications, Windows everything, STAY with Windows!! You don’t have to change if you don’t want to. If Windows is great for you, fine then, stay with it. Victor. 2003-08-01 6:48 pm Anonymous It is a good point that this is aimed at targeting windows users who want to learn, but until this comes as the default desktop for a distro, it really doesn’t serve that crowd. People switching from windows aren’t gonna know how to set up an entirely different desktop if they are a linux newbie. In my opinion it would just be easier to learn the windows-similar (not windows exact clone) desktop to learn about linux. 2003-08-01 6:49 pm Anonymous “In my opinion, windows has the worst looking GUI out of any OS. Why not try to duplicate OS X’s interface?” Because Apple would probably sue. Rumor has it that WindowBlinds theme authors who have duplicated the Aqua interface a little too closely have gotten letters from Apple’s lawyers. Not surprising, considering Apple has a history of suing people over design issues. (They sued over the GUI, which they didn’t even invent. Then they sued e-machines over colored computers, of course, they would probably sue interface designer who copy Aqua.) 2003-08-01 6:49 pm Anonymous Why not create a unique interface instead of duplicating other peoples work? 2003-08-01 6:49 pm Anonymous they don’t have to go through the trouble of learning a new interface when switching. Again: If you don’t want something new, why change? Victor. 2003-08-01 6:52 pm Anonymous I mean… if you want Windows look, Windows applications, Windows everything, STAY with Windows!! You don’t have to change if you don’t want to. If Windows is great for you, fine then, stay with it. Victor. Obviously people do want to change, or else there wouldn’t be demand for this DE. Also, Victor, you’re not most people. Windows is easy to use and efficient for the MAJORITY of people, just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s not a useful, important, and valuable project. Also, consider this example…what’s easier to move from…a Ford to a Chevy, or a Ford to a Cessna? I realize this isn’t a perfect analogy, but I think it works. 2003-08-01 6:55 pm Anonymous That’s impressive – some of those GUIs are pixel perfect, they even copied the labels. But ….. they are this -> <- close to copyright infringement. In fact if they were taken to court over it, they’d probably lose. I can’t say I’d have much sympathy. Their goal of making something that XP users can find familiar is a good one, but this is an exact clone. They even seem to have a registry! In their FAQ, it says they don’t think they can be done for it, but it’s a fine line. OTOH they have a VERY good FAQ. These guys clearly know what they’re doing, they have a goal, and are working towards it. Bravo I say. 2003-08-01 6:56 pm Anonymous Why not create a unique interface instead of duplicating other peoples work? Because sometimes someone else’s idea is the best one. If everybody did what you just recommended, we’d still be stuck somewhere in the 80’s for our computer systems…what if Microsoft and Apple had said, blahh, why create Windows and MacOS when Xerox has already done a GUI Also, it’s interesting that Linux is for all intents and purposes a clone of UNIX. So why not run a clone desktop on a clone OS? 2003-08-01 6:58 pm Anonymous I think that they do an amazing job of emulating an amazing interface, but it seems that their efforts could be put into something else. It looks very much like Windows (with a few exceptions, such as icons, that obviously weren’t meant to be like Windows). These are obviously some very talented people. However wouldn’t it be better for them to base it off of Windows, but then make it individual, eventually completely leaving the Windows interface behind? 2003-08-01 6:58 pm Anonymous http://www.ly-tech.com/img/snapshot3.jpg http://www.ly-tech.com/img/snapshot5.jpg 2003-08-01 7:00 pm Anonymous Windows is more that its look and feel. I may want the look and feel of Windows, but access to a full featured PIM that is not available on Windows, such as Evolution. I may want to use a platform that has less likelihood of being infected by viruses, but still have the look and feel of Windows. Since Linux has a wide varierty of Window Managers and DE’s I could setup XFCE for myself, KDE for someone else and maybe XPDE for guests, friends etc. 2003-08-01 7:02 pm Anonymous I definitely see the clear resemblance to Aqua . C’mon all those mimic are the horizontal lines and the translucent menu’s, the buttons look different, the windows aren’t rounded. This is just a aquafied theme, Apple does go head over heels about direct copy’s of aqua and that’s why people do what you showed in those screenshots. 2003-08-01 7:06 pm Anonymous My point is: stay with the original, don’t use a copy. Because the original is better, because you Windows user have no reason to switch to another desktop that is exactly like the one you already got. Victor. 2003-08-01 7:12 pm Anonymous What happens if I want the original look and feel of Windows but don’t want the rest of Windows? 2003-08-01 7:14 pm Anonymous Why not create a unique interface instead of duplicating other peoples work? I’ve always thought the same thing myself. I’ve thought about new ways to layout a GUI, but it is a very difficult task to be innovative and create an easy-to-use desktop at the same time. For me, i’m just really sick of the windows interface. It is a good one, but damn…we’ve been using the start menu and taskbar since 1995. For 8 years. I think there would almost have to be an advancement in peripherals and input devices to make an OS easier to use. I’m hoping that Longhorn will do something about the beaten-to-a-pulp start menu taskbar thing. 2003-08-01 7:15 pm Anonymous I’ve read some faq’s at the XPde site and i really think that he’s right. Windows means loss of a lot of money, when you buy the OS, you must buy an office, some virus programs, some painting programs etc (it means sth like 1000 dollars minimal), but when you take Linux you have all inside; the problem is that the windows user isn’t familiar to linux OS; he needs some time to be used with linux, so this project just helps. The author says that this project isn’t done to be used forever, but just temporarly, in order that the windows user get used with the new system. Isn’t like that Victor??? 2003-08-01 7:42 pm Anonymous Didn’t I hear that Microsoft wanted to shutdown this product? They said that it violated copyright guidelines or so. I could be wrong. 2003-08-01 7:42 pm Anonymous themes.org got a cease and desist from apple when ppl started mimicing their interface: http://slashdot.org/articles/00/02/17/131240.shtml 2003-08-01 7:46 pm Anonymous Windows XP, like it or not, is THE Window Manager to most non-geeks (Yeah, yeah… The 3% OSX users or whatever can cry foul here, but you’re not the majority now, are you?). Windows XP is full of security issues and the average person is finally becoming aware of this. Particularly now that we have our government telling us these facts (http://www.nipc.gov/warnings/advisories/2003/Potential7302003.htm) in addition to major new outlets (http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/07/31/internet.atttack/index….). Now is an excellent time to be a non-MS product that can appeal to the masses! I’d argue that now would be a good time for a company to release a distrubution built around a modern Linux kernel (Perhaps wait for 2.6?), XPDE, and the latest version of either Codeweavers Wine, or good old non-Codeweavers Wine. Throw in some pre-configured and ready to go apps such as a P2P client, an IMer, and perhaps a few games, and you’re ready to meet the masses who are quickly growing disillusioned over their MS investments. Imagine the average person who’s currently living in fear of virii, and the RIAA, who suddenly finds that they can switch to a stable OS such as Linux, run it in the same manner, and with the same GUI as their beloved XP, AND an OS that allows them to run the majority of their Windows apps, in addition to new and exciting Linux programs! It’s a great opportunity, and one that’d be easily do-able. Xandros distributes Codeweavers as part of their distro, and it’s a win-win as you don’t have to purchase it seperate, and then install. To the user, it’s a seamless OS that just works! Before all the naysayers jump up, I realize that Codeweavers cannot run EVERYTHING, but it can run the majority of what one would want to run (Many programs run that aren’t officially supported, and the “official” list includes Photoshop 7, Quicken, MS Office, IE, among others). And since the average person just wants to surf, email, IM, and write a few reports or letters, this will fit the need nicely! Either way, great job on XPde guys! 2003-08-01 7:52 pm Anonymous I actually went in the complete opposite direction. I have an iBook running OSX (as opposed to PPC Linux 🙁 ) and replaced Aqua with a QNX theme. Believe it or not, UI responsiveness is much improved now that the system doesn’t have to draw those crazy stripes and high colored widgets. Doing this won’t anger Apple will it? 2003-08-01 7:58 pm Anonymous You know what’s most funny about this XPde thingy? After all those years it’s still not possible to do something simple like changing or adding new environment variables (graphically!!! not using the cli) for any user using GNOME and neither using KDE (or any other desktop environment). GNOME and KDE are both too much focused at doing other things instead of the basic stuff: making it easy to use the computer and changing settings. 2003-08-01 8:02 pm Anonymous While I realize the purpose of the project is the ease the transition to the X Windowing System, is it really necessary to use an ugly color scheme and hard 3D edges? I don’t see a lot of MS Windows users get overwhelmed when they see that Luna has rounded buttons and edges. 2003-08-01 8:02 pm Anonymous To a non-geek user, they don’t care how the interface is laid out they just learn to use it. I know I’m making a broad assumption but I’m basing it on my own experience with non-techie users such as friends and family, and even coworkers. Making Linux look and behave like Windows will make such users feel more comfortable by seeing something familiar. For example, there are certain window themes that don’t use a big X to represent the close button. Having that X button in the corner of the window helps people know its function because they learned it in Windows. Same goes for the KDE/Gnome “start” buttons and the taskbar. The comments here seem to have 2 competing ideals. On one hand we want to bring Linux to the masses and on the other we want to move away from the old “it’s so last millenium” desktop style of start menu/taskbar. Well, that’s why these projects exist, different people want different things. 2003-08-01 8:32 pm Anonymous [i] It 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…[i] How is this easier?!! I’d be pretty pissed if I could cut and paste like in windows! 2003-08-01 8:57 pm Anonymous it’s still not possible to do something simple like changing or adding new environment variables What do you mean, exactly? What kind of environment variables? If it’s common user variables, then most can be set using graphical tools. If it’s obscure system variables that only gurus will use, then what’s wrong with using the command line… 2003-08-01 9:01 pm Anonymous I, *personnaly*, don’t see the point. I think a new user will appreciate a new and peculiar look if he/she changes to Linux from Windows. Maybe on corporate desktops ? Anyway, have it your way, if that’s what people like I see no problems on it. 2003-08-01 9:04 pm Anonymous my favorite joke is the *Registry* ?? Editor !! screenshot … 2003-08-01 9:16 pm Anonymous Glad to see a the Windows GUI being ported to Linux Even the fonts look so much alike 2003-08-01 9:23 pm Anonymous In my opinion, windows has the worst looking GUI out of any OS. Why not try to duplicate OS X’s interface? What ever the aesthetics, the Windows GUI is well designed from the usability point of view, and especially ordinary desktop users in mind. The same with Mac OS. On the other hand, take some default themes of several Linux window managers, or the GUI interfaces of, say, many Linux mediaplayers, and you may start to wonder whether the GUI designers of those GUIs have ever even heard of the word usability. Don’t get me wrong; lots of GUI-based Linux programs are just great, and all the three major desktop environments KDE, GNOME & XFCE are mostly very nice and sometimes better than Windows; and some smaller window managers are excellent too. Also the commandline interface of Linux is, of course, top class. But in my humble opinion, instead of designing e.g. stupid & childish & anti-usable scifi-like default skins for their progs, the designers of Linux software should concentrate more on usability. Usability should be THE goal. An examples: Why is the Xandros file manager (especially its GUI design) often considered the best in the Linux world? It just mimics the functionality and GUI of MS Explorer. Obviously the Explorer GUI desigers did a good job usability-wise. Don’t just always mock MS software, learn what you can both from their good achievments and mistakes in GUI (& other) design. 2003-08-01 9:27 pm Anonymous >> What do you mean, exactly? That was just one of the many examples. >> What kind of environment variables? Those ‘export MY_VARIABLE=now’ kind of env variables. >> If it’s common user variables I meant variables for any user (root, me, whoever) and including system and/or common variables. >> most can be set using graphical tools. Well, as an example, could you please tell me how I can set or change the QTDIR env var without using the cli? or even more important: the PATH variable? and how can I add a new env variable? And all that using an integrated program from the desktop environment and not using some vague non-integrated program for which I have to search the GNOME or KDE application repositories for about 10 days or more. >> If it’s obscure system variables that only gurus will use, then what’s wrong with using the command line… Why do I have to use the cli to change some tiny detail of my system? Who decides what I should use? Why am I not given the _choice_ (this is GNU/Linux, right?) to use the GUI for that? I’ll admit that some tasks are better done using the cli, but that’s not my point – sometimes I’d just like to use my desktop without typing any command. Try using your system (including for tasks other than using your word processor, like refreshing your web connection without typing ‘/sbin/ifup eth0’) for 2 weeks without touching the command line.. Believe me, you can’t. And that’s the biggest issue with GNU/Linux. (which I do love and use every day) 2003-08-01 9:58 pm Anonymous Not everyone *needs* a GUI config editor as much as you. If you need one so damned badly, write it yourself (Don’t except a THING from a free operating system, just use what it offers and make up for what it don’t yourself, these things aren’t written by a team of people paid to do it 9-5, its mostly written by people in their freetime). There are some floating around, IIRC gnome2 has a registry-like configuration editor for itself/gnome apps. People don’t generally need a GUI which’ll let them mess their system up in 3 clicks, maybe its better the very low-level stuff doesn’t have a unified config editor, someone that knows enough to know they need to change it *will* know how to use a CLI. 2003-08-01 9:59 pm Anonymous I’m curious about the Borland compiler…does it offer advantages over gcc? If so, what are they? Are others using it too? 2003-08-01 10:07 pm Anonymous It’s not the compiler, it’s the : a) IDE b) Class library c) language extensions that make delphi/kylix work well. 2003-08-01 10:19 pm Anonymous “I’m curious about the Borland compiler…does it offer advantages over gcc? If so, what are they? Are others using it too?” It offers the advantage of being easier to learn because it is based on Pascal, which is much easier to learn than C or C++. Delphi/Kylix is basically Borland’s answer to Microsoft Visual Basic. 2003-08-01 10:29 pm Anonymous Definitely not as “pretty” as other X themes but what a great idea. Windows users who are considering a conversion to Linux will definitely appreciate these efforts. 2003-08-01 10:44 pm Anonymous Fortunately not everyone is as arrogant as you are, otherwise none but geeks would be using Linux. As you can read above, I don’t like your language, please change that, or behold the curse of Microsoft. Many operations that should be possible using the GUI cannot be done using some configuration editor, there’s no way around that sad fact. As you could read, I’m really not telling people what they should code, I’m just telling what a basic GUI should be able to do, mostly from my own experiences with it. Take the advice, or stay with your cli, and please, don’t read it as it is obviously not intended for you. Oh, and: >> People don’t generally need a GUI which’ll let them mess their system up in 3 clicks Thank you for telling me what I or other people should do. So, is that the reason I’m using GNU/Linux and other Free Software? No, I’m using it to get _choice_ in what software and other stuff I’m using on my system and not to be told what I should do, neither by you and neither by any company. It’s nice to be able to control the system completely using the cli, without touching any gui program. It would be nice to be able to do that using the gui, without touching any cli program. If the latter will only be possible using this XPde, there’s no additional value to use GNU/Linux over Windows version whatever. (apart from having crashes suddenly happen instead of getting a ‘nice’ blue screen or crash dialog) And in case you’re worrying: I’m not talking about dropping the cli stuff, I’m talking about _adding_ gui stuff. _useful_ gui stuff. sigh. 2003-08-01 10:56 pm Anonymous WHY would you want to copy Windows???? Desktop Linux is at a point where it can evolve into anything it wants – why not innovate? I’m speechless… Linux users are coming off as unimaginative, cheap crybabies. 2003-08-02 12:06 am Anonymous I can understand that some users might want a more familiar interface, but I can’t really see this helping them much. IMO the easiest part of switching to Linux is getting used to a different DE, after all KDE and GNOME are both very similar to Windows. They both have taskbars, start menus, desktops, etc. they may have different names and locations but they can be learned in minutes. Compared with editing config files, using the command line and learning new apps, the look of the DE seems like a non-issue to me. 2003-08-02 12:32 am Anonymous I first installed xpde 0.3, upgrading to 0.4 was very easy. This version is very usable!! much better than 0.3. The only crash so far I’ve seen is when you run ksnapshot. Lots of the GUIs are still missing, but you can make icons and once all your icons are set up, its very usable! Great job guys. Very impressive. 2003-08-02 1:01 am Anonymous Linux is at a point where it can evolve into anything it wants – why not innovate? I’m speechless… This people are very good designers we have to agree. they did a great job on a quality gui. Cloning the Windows gui is a waste of talent and time. You can’t make Linux way of doing things (file permissions, different sys users rights, …) work like the Windows Exlorer and why waste time improving it on things like “Show web folders” on the Win Explorer clone ? (seems to be a reasonable next project goal for this people) … or making a Registry editor ? An average user of windows never heard about the regedt32.exe even if they open it there is a hard wall to hit your head against (it happened – still happens – with my head …). And I like the windows gui (I use it since the first win NT4 version came out and I still like it); not bloated, elegant, quite fast, even pretty, very usable and simple, (hard to achieve on all complex things), … but not on Linux/BSD. Don’t waste your talent and risk a copyright problem. It’s nothing of my bussiness but why not improve the ICEwm ? Make it ICEwm2 NExT Generation, a new project with some innovation. This is a usable gui (ICEwm), uses few ressorces, but needs desiging (the themes are rather unpolished, except the motif theme). 2003-08-02 3:18 am Anonymous Some *IDIOTIC* users always pushing that stupid talk “ewww Windows GUI is just so horrible I hate it”. It’s funny to see these Linux diaper babies complaining about Windows, since KDE and GNOME have done all they could to emulate and give the user the same useful and handy tools Microsoft had created. 2003-08-02 4:28 am Anonymous 1) The majority of people are quite happy with the Windows GUI, what people do have issues with is the underlying infrastructure that results in instability, insecurity – aka, the shatter attack which cannot befixed due to the fact it is deliberate design, and generally a lack of any flexibility once one becomes skilled and knows the in’s and out’s of Windows. 2) IIRC, Apple was not annoyed because the interface was a clone but because the authors had used icons ripped off the Mac desktop and used Apple logos in an unauthorised fashion. 3) Nothing new or innovative will come out in terms of UI design for another 10 years. The fact remains that no matter how “original” some people would love to make their UI out to be, it is mearly a reflection on the influences they have had as a computer user, meaning, most take a semi-working concept and “fix it” to what they consider useful. For example, GNOME is a combination of MacOS and Windows, however, if you look at the HIG, the layout of icons etc, it has a strong lean towards MacOS, for example, the OK/Cancel button order would be one example. 4) In regards to wine, Most of the core has been completed or almost completed. Once the core has been completed then the wine team will put more emphasis on creating a complete collection of libraries required to run software. In regards to the Microsoft C Runtime library, has there been any word on its development? wouldn’t it be possible to simply create a wrapper around libc and thus cut down on a duplication of effort? 2003-08-02 7:27 am Anonymous GNOME is a combination of MacOS and Windows, however, i I would say KDE is so much more a combination of it … with a bigger emphasis on the Mac gui (icons, buttons, layout, options …). [i]aka, the shatter attack which cannot befixed due to the fact it is deliberate design, and generally a lack of any flexibility .on[i] Windows was designed for speed ! (like it or not) 2003-08-02 8:14 am Anonymous wanting to clone xp i can understand but wanting to clone the most useless text editor known to man is sick. at least make it a little more featureful. btw, what toolkit does it use? will there be themes for xpde/ 2003-08-02 9:57 am Anonymous This kind of project could allow my company to switch most desktop users to Linux. Maybe Linuxheads don’t like it, but when you need to switch peoples who are not tech-head and need to be productive quickly on a new OS, having the same GUI is a huge help ! 2003-08-02 10:32 am Anonymous the windows gui is a good gui. you can do virtually EVERTHING with your system thru the gui, of course you can in most cases get out your command prompt and tap away if that’s your thing (the way it should be – a choice in ways of working!) However PPL please bear in mind that most people learn to use a computer running windows. Most “introduction to computer” courses use windows too. I reckon that most the windows GUI features go unused by most people, but they are familiar with it and let’s face it, they’d be scared still of Linux and it’s Horrible CLI. The problem with using the CLI is that you have to know what to type in to get your results and you have to know where things are located on your system (config files etc) With a gui you can hunt and click, exploring as you go and learning. With the CLI you have to know what to type ahead of time! I personally think the XPDE is a brilliant idea anything that it makes it easier for ppl to switch from the beast of Redmond’s is a welcome thing surely? Oh and BTW: to anyone who says “if you dont’ like it, go code it yourself” are just idiots, it’s not a solution to anyone’s problem! 2003-08-02 11:28 am Anonymous it’ll never feel like windows. Look most windows user, never ‘recompile the kernel’, ‘compile the source code’, ‘make this/make that’, edit text config file…wow…even try to set X to show high res is a nightmare …arrrggghhh…what is that /bin, /opt, /usr….oh sorry you gotta type A not a …blleeehhh…. and because most linux looks like windows, actually many users will be disappointed and never bother to switch to a inferior clone. I really don’t Understand why you linux people can not invent new GUI / new experience?, a company NeXT, has shown a beautiful and easy to use UNIX is possible. 2003-08-02 2:37 pm Anonymous Why are these people coding something THEY want to code in their free time? How dare they not do what -I- want them to do!? Bloody hypocrites. 2003-08-02 2:47 pm Anonymous it’ll never feel like windows. I’m running it right now and it feels VERY much like windows. Look most windows user, never ‘recompile the kernel’, ‘compile the source code’, ‘make this/make that’, edit text config file…wow…even try to set X to show high res is a nightmare …arrrggghhh…what is that /bin, /opt, /usr….oh sorry you gotta type A not a …blleeehhh…. Dumb. You don’t have to compile a kernel to run linux, you dont have to compile source code to run linux, setting the res in X is just as easy in linux as in windows or mac. /bin /opt /usr is MUCH better than A: B: C: D: E: F: G: etc… and because most linux looks like windows, actually many users will be disappointed and never bother to switch to a inferior clone. Hardly inferior, people are switching in droves. I really don’t Understand why you linux people can not invent new GUI / new experience?, a company NeXT, has shown a beautiful and easy to use UNIX is possible. We can, just becasue XPde exists, that does not mean it is the only option available. Open your eyes. Your post is nothing but FUD plain and simple. 2003-08-02 10:05 pm Anonymous I mean… if you want Windows look, Windows applications, Windows everything, STAY with Windows!! You don’t have to change if you don’t want to. If Windows is great for you, fine then, stay with it. I agree with this sentiment for the most part; however, I know many Windows users who are tired of Microsoft and tired of paying the high prices for Windows and the programs that run on it. I think for them this could be a good thing, depending upon how stable and feature rich it is. Slightly O.T.: I haven’t tried xpde (because I, like others, don’t like Windows’ sterile interface), but unlike its Windows original, xpde most likely supports the ability to change window focus without changing the window’s Z-order. As far as UI goes, that is the most significant missing feature of Windows for me; and is probably the main UI reason I don’t like using Windows (there are at least a hundred other, non-UI reasons). 2003-08-03 3:49 am Anonymous Actually I think you can do the sloppy focus thing with a Windows add-on (an actual one from MS, not some 3rd party one) My own problems with the UI go far beyond that, but I’m a picky Mac user 2003-08-03 5:56 am Anonymous XPde is NOT a waste of time. There is a real purpose and need for this sort of project. MS didn’t throw billions of dollars into UI research and come up with total crap. Why not benefit from their money? Look, most of you here are still using those ‘yucky’ Intel x86 spinoff chips, right? I mean really – only EIGHT registers? What is this, 1980?!! Why haven’t you whiners dumped your Intel chips for PPC, Alpha, or Itanium? Hmmmm? C’mon, aren’t you ‘REAL’ computer users?! Whether you use AMD or Intel, Windows or Linux, XPde or Gnome, it really doesn’t matter does it? The question is: Does it get the job done in a reasonable fashion? Another related question is: Can I afford it? And I mean that in every sense of the word. I know that if and when I decide to move Linux onto the desktops here at Linden Hall, it will be using something like XPde to help transition the faculty and students. Not everyone is as enthusistic about learning new computery things as we are. I LOVE tinkering with new OS’s and environments, but the vast majority of my users look to their computer as a tool – a familiar tool. Change that familiarity and it leads to major frustration. Egads! Look at how close Openoffice.org is to MS Office – when we switched to that two years ago you should have heard the complaining! Thankfully, a little time with it and an understanding of the benefits of OOo has made people far more appreciative of it. 2003-08-03 8:27 am Anonymous It says in the instruction how to make it default, but I want to add it to the login menu, where the other window managers are. (SuSE 8.2) So..? 2003-08-03 9:58 am Anonymous Log in as root, go to the Control Center and choose System/Login Manager and in the Sessions tab, add XPde to the list (probably with small letters, thus xpde, just enter the name you would use from the command line) Btw. I think it can be handy too, for example, in an Uni people can use a Windows-like environment and still use tools like LaTeX and have their /home on the Sun NFS server and such. 2003-08-03 2:18 pm Anonymous >> Why not benefit from their money? No, not their money.. our money.. (I’ve been paying Microsoft Tax for too long) 2003-08-03 10:29 pm Anonymous I can’t get this thing to work on Mandrake 9.1. I followed the instructions for Mandrake 8.2 while using 9.1, it did set up but the fonts are messed up and a lot of UI elements are missing from the desktop, looks nothing like in the screen shots. I know I’ve done something wrong. Someone should post some instructions about installing XPDE on Mandrake 9.1. 2003-08-04 1:26 am Anonymous MS is not good at making many OS stuff, but GUI is something after my opinion they CAN. I think this is a great idea, especially for former WIN users. 2003-08-04 5:52 pm Anonymous >> No, not their money.. our money.. >> (I’ve been paying Microsoft Tax for too long) Bad analogy. Unlike a tax, you do not have to pay Microsoft. I certainly have not. But I do pay my taxes. Microsoft’s money was paid to them for a product and is thus theirs. Once the transaction was made it is quite really “their” money… not yours.