What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
CNET Top Weekly Download for Free Anti-Virus view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
44 Comments
- raynevandunem, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22I tried Dreamlinux during summer last year, I think. It's an amazing-looking distro, clearly looking to Mac OS X for aesthetic purposes (especially now that they have AIGLX + Beryl in there for the next version).
However, that has me wondering: does the average Linux distro have to take its interface design cues from Mac OS X in order to attract a draw of users, while still keeping the UNIX-ness about it intact?
I mean, there have been propositions for better-looking, or better-accessible desktop interfaces, such as the Mezzo Desktop or ROX Desktop. However, we only see the Win32-ist interface of KDE, the twin taskbar interface of GNOME, and the barely-Mac-like interface of XFCE as standard.
I think there's a reason why there are such lower interface standards on Linux than Mac:
Linux vendors seem to be more concerned with the whole OS.
Apple (and even Microsoft) seems to be more concerned with the desktop applications.
This is reflected in their practices:
Linux vendors seek to stuff all the applications into one install .iso. Any other applications that are needed are to be found within the distro's repository, or nowhere else.
Apple's OS X code is only open enough to allow Unix geeks to help improve it; applications (shareware and freeware) of various kinds are provided by countless vendors from their own sites, and Apple provides the type of application development environment that attracts them to OS X.
At least, that's just what I notice. - ufoman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Damn, I was hoping this was Linux on the Dreamcast.
- matthewsr2000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9what we have to remember is that Mac OSX and Windows have spent countless hours and numberless surveys to see what people like and what feels and looks pretty to a majority of people. when linux copies those styles it does so to appeal to the same group of people that like -or have become accustomed to- the look and feel of the other OS's.
Now i'm all for trying to find something better, but copying the style of others is how most artists begin. i'd much rather have the dev's spend there time on what's under the hood instead of the hood itself. - jbus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I tested it and it's a very nice light-weight, but extremely functional, desktop. The only issues I had with it was, it needs better English documentation and community support, and some of it's configuration dialogs need to be polished up to match the rest of the OS's polish. Also, the dock on the bottom needs to be easier for users to configure. But, overall this distro shows a lot of promise and I look forward to future releases.
- AstralSin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Xubuntu support is pretty much synonymous with Ubuntu support, of which there is plenty
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6This distro has been getting some fine reviews recently (see for example: http://knolinux.com/2007/01/04/dreamlinux-multimedia-edition-22--things-just-keep-getting-better-in-brazil.aspx ). What's more encouraging is that it's country of origin is moving to Linux very fast, e.g.
EnabledPeople & partners deploys 50,000 Linux desktops in Brazil January 6
http://www.enabledpeople.com/blog/2007/01/06/bitway-imtech-enabledpeople-had-deployed-about-50000-linux-desktops-in-brazil-since-september-2006/ - raynevandunem, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I just like how they put an Apple-like gradient on the Debian logo.
http://dreamlinux.com.br/english/imagens/banner.jpg
Compare to these:
http://images.apple.com/intel/images/indextoptransition20060807.jpg
http://images.apple.com/universal/images/universaltop20060109.jpg - Djmc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4looks pretty nice, but please note that Beryl isn't available in a live CD environment, you need to install to have that functionality
- KungFuJesus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@raynevandunem
if you want a linux distro with a totally new file system setup, see Gobo Linux - thecompkid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3dudes, relax. I was just kiddin.
I ain't hatin on the dreamcast. - brianez21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Your smile is the wrong direction.
- michuk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The dock is "engage" from E17, as explained in the article :)
- raynevandunem, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ bmartin
"What does any of this have to do w/ the fact that it's still Linux, even if my window manager is Fluxbox?"
A whole lot, actually.
Based on your reference to OS X, if the interface for it were changed to a glossy black GNOME, it would still be Darwin, just without the Aqua interface, and all that is tied to it, which made it the Mac OS X product with which we are most familiar.
Actually, I just hit on something....
Essentially, Darwin, if judged by the same standards which are applied to the Linux distroverse, is still Darwin with or without the Aqua interface. However, Apple specifically downplays that fact, and sells it + Aqua to the public as Mac OS X. Thus, to the rest of the public, there is no "Darwin + Aqua", only the Mac OS X product.
The same logic can be applied to Tivo, which uses Embedded Linux. When they sell that Tivo to you, they don't tell you that it's running Linux (in fact, they don't even tell you about the operating system inside at all!), only that "its a Tivo".
Meanwhile, Linux on the desktop and server is known as Linux throughout. By the logic of the Linux distroverse, there really is no Ubuntu, Debian, Red Hat/Fedora, Gentoo, SuSE, or Arch; only Linux. Hence, when a Ubuntu "n00b" makes a generalizing argument that Linux isn't ready for the desktop, it applies to all of the distros which dub themselves as a "Linux distribution", and not just to Gentoo.
This applies to the interfaces as well. GNOME, KDE, and XFCE (yes, even Fluxbox and every other window manager or desktop environment) are all made to cater and supply to the Linux/UNIX desktop market. Hence, they are also seen as more immediate manifestations of the Linux distroverse, and are tied directly to it.
Thus, if someone uses KDE on Kubuntu, and finds himself debilitated in any form or fashion (no matter how trivial the gripe may be to more advanced, long-haul users), they will blame all of Linuxdom all the same for those shortcomings, and go back to Windows with a bitter taste for "Linux" in his mouth.
Hence, the only way that a Linux distro can opt out of the Linux distroverse, and thus be judged on its own merit (both in the underlying system and the desktop interface) is if it decides to DROP the "Linux distro" description.
If Mac OS X can successfully get away with being a UNIX-like system without describing itself as a "bastard fork of FreeBSD", and if Tivo can get away with being an embedded-Linux system without describing itself as a "Linux distribution", then so can any Linux-based OS which desires some of what makes Linux on the desktop important without being "just another Linux".
So yes, the interface has a bit to do with it, but, in the end, its all about how you market yourself as an OS. - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Not every link is SPAM. I know nothing about that site, but its message is relevant.
- bmartin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"does the average Linux distro have to take its interface design cues from Mac OS X in order to attract a draw of users, while still keeping the UNIX-ness about it intact?"
Linux distro vendors don't normally spend much time worrying about UI "design". The Gnome/KDE/Xfce/etc. people handle that. What does any of this have to do w/ the fact that it's still Linux, even if my window manager is Fluxbox? If the OS X interface changed significantly, would it cease to be OS X? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"Additional codecs enable for viewing multimedia in restricted/non-free formats like QuickTime, Windows Media or Real. "
Get it now before the letters go out. - stateq2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow...this really looks nice. I also like that it's Debian based.
- synorgy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Not so sure about increased usability with Mezzo or Rox.
Mezzo has a lot to work out before it can be usable
and ROX seems to be very similar to anything else I have used.
The general appeal, I've found, is that people who want to 'switch' but don't want to pay look at GNU / Linux and see it as pretty and stable / not prone to viruses - so they switch - but many of them aren't prepared for the total switch that it is from Windows. - nipuL, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I've been using ROX for almost 5 years. Every now and then, I give the other Desktop Environments and File Managers a go, but I always come back. It's fast, light weight, very simple to use (my partner loves it), and it's drag and drop capabilities make it a dream to use. Many "modern", "polished" desktop environments could learn a lot from ROX.
- HsoKinees, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2meh, personally, i find the MAC OSX theme repulsive.. i don't know why..
- dbr_onix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Good. OS X is a nice looking OS, more distros need to be.. "inspired" by the good points of popular OS's.
- Ben - secleinteer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Does anyone know what iconset is used in the screenshots on the Dreamlinux site? They look pretty good ;)
- loomis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Ubuntu support isn't necessarily synomomous with xubuntu. There's no specific forum, and only random intermixed and spotty posts, which are often a pain to locate due to the lingo. Do you search for xubuntu? xfce? xfce4? etc. And none of the xfce devs ever post on the ubuntu forums.
- Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Whoops, oh well, thanks a lot. Funny, I had no clue that was Enlightenment, looks great though.
- Lazybones, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4First distro with a default install that I don't think looks butt ugly. Problem is that at the same time it is completely unoriginal.
Why must Linux look like windows or mac OS to look pretty? - raynevandunem, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1matthewsr2000 said further up:
"Now i'm all for trying to find something better, but copying the style of others is how most artists begin."
Furthermore, Linux was very late to the GUI party. It had been preceded by X11 (on proprietary Unices), Macintosh, Amiga, RISC OS, and so on. Therefore, it had to use X11 (what was most available to them at that time), and follow the paradigms of the other operating systems without changing most of the internals.
It has been like that for most of the history of GNU/Linux. Like PCLinuxOS, it can look damn near Luna-on-WinXP, or like DreamLinux, it can look damn near Mac OS X. However, whatever graphical incarnation it may assume next, you can be assured that:
1) you'll have X11 by default
2) you'll have some package management system and repository as your only means of obtaining software in a graphical manner
3) it'll have the Linux kernel
4) it will still call itself a Linux distribution, with the ultimate purpose of liberating you from the evil Emperor Zurg...I mean Bill.
5) it will possess the exact same filesystem heirarchy as was present in the very first Unix system, circa-1969.
Once again, it can be as Mac-like or Amiga-like as it wants to be on the exterior, but you won't ever see much change on the inside. - addicted68098, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Am I the only one who doesn't like the Mac Style Tray?
- Djmc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Its Debian based, there is plenty of documentation on Debian.
- Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What is that dock? Is that cairo-dock? Gnome-dock? or some other third or fourth option? It looks good.
- apescissors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1After a problematic install (the installer is beta and not finished) I finally got this bitch running. I love it. If anyone else is having the problem where the installer stops after loading all the software on to the partitions look in the tutorials section of the main site. Worked for me.
- Vinvin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it is.... An Xfce forum! http://forum.xfce.org/
Anyway, I don't agree that Xubuntu could learn a lot from them, as Xubuntu has totally different goals (e.g. not multimedia targeted). You can easily get support (http://www.xubuntu.org/help) and development is just as fast as Ubuntu, which is quite fast IMHO. For example, the main developer of the file manager Thunar has praised Xubuntu for having such up-to-date packages of Thunar.
Oh, and Xubuntu devs post on the Ubuntu Forums. - jchrome, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This looks amazing. Maybe this will be the distro to get me to make the switch? Or at least part-time when not gaming (or at work)...?
The bundled apps are awesome too. Downloading the torrent now. Thanks for the link. - harrisonpowers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1here too man :D
this looks pretty awesome though, i'm going to have to try it out. - mono6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2A cloned GUI doesn't make an UI great. I looked up their website and found no documentation, no wiki, a very inactive forum and mute user community.
Great, I can look at a nifty OSX desktop, but how does that help me getting my hardware to *work*?
*yawn* - donuts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's about time, a Linux distro built around aesthetic sense.
- loomis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2We'll have to see what happens with this distro. It's in an interesting position if it does indeed have an active developer community. It is interesting because while I enjoy Xubuntu, the development is slow and the support is virtually non-existant. I don't even think there is a decent discussion forum for it, and there certainly isn't one for XFCE, so you end up with a sort of double lack of information available to you. If Dreamlinux can provide a good product with a good support base and strong user community, I see no reason why it couldn't overtake Xubuntu completely.
Of course this will probably ultimately depend on whatever happens with the slooooow XFCE development. Just as Fluxbox faulters due to no documentation, bugginess, turtle-like development, and scores of outdated and non-functional dockapps, XFCE fails as well due to many broken panel-apps, bad documentation, slow development, etc. I for one have grown so frustrated with Xubuntu and XFCE bugginess that I have switched back to a straight Gnome Ubuntu setup, despite the bloat and speed decrease. - k0rd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Dreamlinux wouldn't recognize my router, so I just uninstalled and went back to Ubuntu.
- apescissors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's Debian based mate. Look for Debian/Ubuntu help or tutorials and it they work.
*yawn at people that have no frigging idea what they are slagging off* - stateq2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1What you just said doesn't make much sense. Linux desktops don't have to look like any other OS to look pretty. Also, why do people tend to look down on certain versions of OS's that visually emulate another OS?
- michuk, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1schestowitz: the second link does not seem to work
- subxero37, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I never liked Bitstream Vera Sans... that's my only complaint.
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Odd, the link has broken..
Done a quick search on the site...
http://www.enabledpeople.com/blog/2007/01/06/bitway-imtech-enabledpeople-deploys-50000-linux-desktops-in-brazil/
Why do they modify permalinks after it's published...? - TomP, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Unbelivable sneeky spam...
- thecompkid, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2what's a dreamcast?
(;
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
