digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Fedora 9 released ! we have the first screenshots of Sulphur

linux-noob.com — Here are some shots from the install. I will not go into detail when it comes to these. One thing that has changed is the encryption option (i did not test this), that allows you to make and install to an encrypted partition. uname -a Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.25-14.fc9.i686 #1 SMP Thu May 1 06:28:41 EDT 2008 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • anyweb, on 05/11/2008, -27/+8oh yeah it's codename is Sulphur !

    cheers
    anyweb
  • Kingoftherings, on 05/11/2008, -14/+3Not really digging the background, but its better than what it used to be in the Beta...
    • Darkx1337, on 05/11/2008, -1/+7I like the background. To bad my D-link card won't work on Fedora. :(
  • kingofpenguins, on 05/11/2008, -5/+29I'm surprised that GTK programs in KDE aren't by default using something to make them look less ugly.

    http://kde-look.org/content/show.php/gtk-kde4?cont ...
    http://kde-look.org/content/show.php/QtCurve+(KDE4 ...

    I'm sure that one of those could have been used by default.
    • elbekko, on 05/11/2008, -17/+9KDE is ugly by default, not much point in trying to improve it.
      • autoatsakiklis, on 05/11/2008, -1/+8It's GTK2 apps that look ugly in KDE.
      • rlbond86, on 05/12/2008, -4/+5Too bad GTK apps use the worst interface in the world. Qt is just better.
        • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2So you drank the koolaide too? Shame...
    • Buu700, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Don't forget gtk-qt-engines-kde4 (at least that's the package name in Ubuntu).
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/11/2008, -9/+1"I'm surprised that GTK programs in KDE aren't by default using something to make them look less ugly."

      Translation:
      "I'm surprised KDE and Gnome didn't choose prettier default themes."
      • Giga, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3That's not the translation. They were wondering why something like gtk-qt-engine wasn't used by default in Fedora. Has nothing to do with default themes of GTK apps under Gnome or Qt apps under KDE.
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Sorry I completely read that wrong. You're right.
    • omababy, on 05/11/2008, -3/+4look at all the retards fighting over QT4 vs. GTK2+
      • Frost9999, on 05/11/2008, -7/+6Yet another reason linux is not winning desktops over...
        • mdramige, on 05/11/2008, -3/+5Competition is always good.
        • omababy, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4I just think it's stupid "us" open source people are fighting over stupid things all the time.
          • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3That will always happen when you have a bunch of really brilliant people who have completely different philosophies in their approach to UI design, software design, etc... It's not stupid, it's life. If they weren't going for each other's throats about this, it would be politics, religion, sports or even who has the hotter girlfriend/wife.
          • CGA1, on 05/12/2008, -2/+0That's a contradiction in itself, if they were brilliant they wouldn't fight, they would discuss.
          • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3@CGA1

            It's possible to be brilliant, stubborn and arrogant at the same time. Brilliance has nothing to do with being agreeable. In fact, many times the most brilliant people are HIGHLY disagreeable. Hence the need for "dictators" with a vision. Steve Jobs is an example. Linus Torvalds is another.
          • CGA1, on 05/12/2008, -2/+0I didn't say they had to be agreeable, just that they don't have to fight. Different opinions are good for evolution, fighting is not.
    • meooow, on 05/11/2008, -15/+1You know this linux stuff is just a fad, nobody will pay you for being a linux geek, it's just like nobodys gonna pay you to be a starwars geek... Way to waste your time. Enjoy your neckbeards and your virginity.
      • Tenoq, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3Don't know of many fads that have lasted over 20 years. Except maybe Windows. That's definitely just a fad.
      • sudowrestler, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2You don't think a lot of people get paid very well for Unix skills? And more of the net runs on Linux servers than on Windows IIS.
    • nxtwrld, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2that's probably because GTK and KDE are different UIs. KDE does not come with GTK just as GTK does not come with KDE. Several distributions (e.g. Ubuntu) have them preinstalled and some are trying to use the same visual style for both of them, but by default each comes with their own skin. It's a lot like Java applications UI, that usually do not respect the visual style of windows....

      But yes, default GTK theme is pretty ugly
      • webcrumb, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2GTK is a graphics toolkit
        KDE is a desktop environment

        KDE uses the QT UI graphics toolkit
        GNOME uses the GTK toolkit

        Apps built using either toolkit will run in either desktop environment, but if the environment variable for the theme hasn't been set (which is usually taken care of by the DE's session manager) then you get the default fugly theme.
  • allywilson, on 05/11/2008, -1/+8I like how they were using KDE and then had a section underneath dedicated to looking at KDE...
    • Waterrat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2Very nice indeed.Good job with KDE.
  • mcduck, on 05/11/2008, -1/+21MIRROR: http://grense.no/linux/ (Images only)
  • LeetBox, on 05/11/2008, -17/+7Front Page with 34 diggs and 6 comments.... and the site's already down.
  • Ghostsfp, on 05/11/2008, -19/+30Hideous
    • Buu700, on 05/11/2008, -2/+7I think it looks nice for the most part, except for some reason they decided to go with GNOME's awful default icon theme.
    • SkySeven, on 05/11/2008, -0/+13One of the areas I'd like to see the KDE folks improve on is the task bar. Why does it have to be so huge? The extra large clock and icons give it a cheap feel.
      (I know you can change it but having the default like this isn't good for first impressions)
      There was a problem completing your request. Please reload the page and try again.
    • srg13, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3I don't know if it's just something to do with KDE's default themes, but I've not ever seen it look anything but hideous.

      I agree this is no exception.
  • Paranormalized, on 05/11/2008, -0/+60The title is wrong.

    Fedora 9 won't be released until Tuesday.
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/9/Schedule
    • mcduck, on 05/11/2008, -6/+9The title is _correct_. It wont be "Released" until Thursday, but its already out on the official mirrors (Just not permitted to download yet).
      • carbonfree314, on 05/11/2008, -9/+7Why would an open source project not release it the moment it's done? Isn't that preventing the free flow of information?
        • cplusplus, on 05/11/2008, -0/+11Give it time to spread to the mirrors.
        • tolbs, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Well if thats the case, anyone find a mirror yet? I've been looking to get my hands on this for weeks.
        • mcduck, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Tolbs, magic is in the .is and .kr:21

          i say no more :P
      • Paranormalized, on 05/11/2008, -0/+11That's not what "released" means.
    • Kratos76, on 05/11/2008, -2/+3Oh come on, close enough. If it was microsoft, it'd be RTM'd.
  • miccet, on 05/11/2008, -7/+9Wow, another theme for Kde / Gnome... And a slightly different config tool... great...
  • burgermeiste, on 05/11/2008, -6/+15Sulphur is where I live. No joke.
    • sanford42, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3If you mean Sulphur La, then I used to live in Lake Charles.
      If you don't mean Sulphur, La, then well, nevermind.
      • burgermeiste, on 05/12/2008, -1/+2I've lived in Lake Charles at one point too.
    • TheSeeker11, on 05/11/2008, -0/+10Welcome to Digg, Satan :)
  • chicaneuk, on 05/11/2008, -13/+34God that looks bad..
    • MikeCerm, on 05/11/2008, -6/+10It really does look terrible. It's like they cobbled together a bunch of design elements from OSX, Vista, Win2K, and made something that looks far worse than all them. If my desktop looked like that, I'd be embarrassed to post screenshots of it. The deskbar and the "start" menu are just a mess, and the app menus look screwed up, like a really badly designed theme.

      Is KDE4 really that bad looking, or has Fedora done something terrible to it? I know it adds a lot of features, but I have to say that the even old KDE looked better.
      • gn0stik, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5Nope, that's just KDE4. Looks just like that in ubuntu too. Just a different background and start menu icon.
      • oobuntu, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1opensuse seem to manage OK so i don't know what fedora's design problem is.
  • svensko, on 05/11/2008, -0/+11You are havink power to walk through planes?! Must inform national security office

    source - http://grense.no/linux/widgets2.png

    Is this joke over my head? Am i missing something?
    • arjie, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2Maybe it's an 'emperor has no clothes' joke. I sell you a plane I tell you is undetectable:)
    • FFLord, on 05/11/2008, -0/+6It's more of a storyline joke, its not really that funny, but you would have to read a good deal of the comic strip to get it.

      On a side note, XKCD would have been a better choice if he was going to submit it to dig...
      • webcrumb, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Box 1:
        One day as I sat looking upward I wondered if there was a stealthed jet hovering above my head...

        Box 2:
        Throws stone

        Box 3:
        Waits for stone to come back
    • svensko, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2I was referring more to the poor english and 'havink'. Was that intentional?
  • wwnexc, on 05/11/2008, -1/+16Time to fire up vmware and make a new virtual machine :D
  • Poofainter888, on 05/11/2008, -23/+6Looks the webserver is done. Perhaps because it's running linux instead of something reliable like IIS?
    • horsepie, on 05/11/2008, -4/+5It's running invision power board which is a closed source and bloated web app
    • autoatsakiklis, on 05/11/2008, -2/+21Linux is not a webserver.
      • Poofainter888, on 05/11/2008, -8/+1What is it then?
        • MethodOne, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5It's a kernel. GNU/Linux is the operating system they're using. They're most likely using Apache for a web server.
        • jay019, on 05/12/2008, -1/+2lol!!!
    • mcmlxxii, on 05/11/2008, -3/+10Plenty images so prob bandwidth. I don't know much about IIS but I'm guessing it doesn't have a checkbox for "quadruple my upload speed". It does have a checkbox for "do you agree to these draconian terms and conditions" though, IIRC.
  • EnigmaStrain, on 05/11/2008, -26/+13...oh man that looks ugly
    I mean ugly
    Fedora= Anna nicole smith

    Ubuntu= Angelina Jolie

    Distro I'm building= Epic
    • blitzcraig711, on 05/11/2008, -6/+23Fedora looks ugly? Ubuntu doesn't? What? Ubuntu is a great OS, but has a very ugly default interface. Fedora has the best looking in the Linux world, in my opinion.
      • mattwalton56, on 05/11/2008, -6/+6...I respect your opinion...even though it's wrong.
        • Mechanicat, on 05/11/2008, -2/+3You don't really respect his opinion then, or do you respect wrong opinion as well? And how can subjective opinions of taste ever be right or wrong? Is chocolate right, and vanilla wrong?
      • nizzy1115, on 05/11/2008, -0/+6I agree with you, but that is why we have different choices. For me i choose fedora over ubuntu because it works much better out of the box on my dell laptop than ubuntu does.
      • podgey22, on 05/11/2008, -2/+1Mandriva's up there too. Gentoo is pretty in its own technical way. But yeah, filthy, muddy Ubuntu is fugly...

        I'm not that shallow though. I use Ubuntu and I've just restyled it - it's not a hard job in any distro.
    • jivemasta, on 05/11/2008, -5/+11Who the ***** cares what it looks like? I don't get this whole Fedora Vs. Ubuntu battle, they are basically the same concept, with different gui. This is why linux will never become a contender in the OS arena, there is too much rivalry between what should be teammates.
      • init100, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5They are team mates, it's just the fanboys that make it into a "war". Ubuntu uses Fedora-developed software, and Fedora uses Ubuntu-developed software.
    • deadbaby, on 05/11/2008, -3/+3The default Ubuntu theme isn't perfect but at least the overall layout is pretty good and consistent and doesn't waste space.
    • greydonkey, on 05/11/2008, -0/+5"Distro I'm building= Epic".
      Pah! My Distro I'M building. Makes your distro look like a bucket of Fail, coated in dung.
  • InspectorGadget, on 05/11/2008, -9/+17Those are some UGLY screenshots...Firefox isn't even themed. I'm also not a fan of the KDE 4 default window decoration, as the underlying new code shows great promise but the initial round of execution is hideous. The whole thing at this point looks like a Fisher-Price knockoff of Windows Vista - an ugly OS to begin with. Here's to hoping that the design work progresses as well as the coding.
    • Mechanicat, on 05/11/2008, -3/+8KDE has always been like ugly like that. It just gives me the creeps.
    • Buu700, on 05/11/2008, -3/+7I hate Windows just as much as the next Digger, but I certainly wouldn't call Vista ugly (though its widgets could be improved a lot).
  • jtrot1000, on 05/11/2008, -7/+6Good idea, ugly implementation.
  • rexprime, on 05/11/2008, -12/+16that is the ugliest desktop i have ever seen... ever
    • gn0stik, on 05/11/2008, -6/+8You obviously haven't been using linux long.
      • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4What the hell is that supposed to mean? I've been using Linux for over decade and I'll say that the ugliest desktops I've seen have always been KDE. Early Gnome was a close competitor, but it's developed well. My favorite WM when I'm not running Compiz-Fusion over Gnome is twm. THAT is the ultimate UI experience once you figure it out.
      • gn0stik, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Just that I remember some pretty hideous WMs for linux. Before KDE and gnome etc got came out/got polished.
  • dimebonics, on 05/11/2008, -9/+5Gross, time to check out FreeBSD 7.0!
    • oasmar1, on 05/11/2008, -0/+5FreeBSD 7.0 looks really good actually, FreeBSD is really improving, especially over the last couple of years.
    • possiblyneil, on 05/11/2008, -1/+4Gross? FreeBSD uses KDE too. I dont know why people are getting worked up about Fedora not looking good considering most people will theme it to look how they want anyway.
  • deadbaby, on 05/11/2008, -4/+14Ewww. The older versions of Fedora looked a lot better. This theme just isn't designed very well.

    1) Why are the icons so massive?
    2) Why are the font sizes so inconsistent? menu fonts are tiny, taskbar fonts are HUGE, root menu fonts are huge
    3) No matching Firefox theme installed by default?
    4) Why are the toolbar icons so massive & inconsistent?
    5) Why doesn't the window border/control theme match the taskbar theme at all?
    6) Very poor font selection or perhaps very poor font rendering.
    7) The taskbar layout doesn't look very efficient. Lots of wasted space.
    • oasmar1, on 05/11/2008, -1/+4I think that is just the basic KDE4 theme.
    • gn0stik, on 05/11/2008, -1/+14It's called KDE4
    • MavRevMatt, on 05/11/2008, -3/+3I agree with most if not all of those points. Then again I've never liked the bulky appearance of KDE.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/11/2008, -6/+4Gnomes default icons are ***** ugly. They look like they are from 1995.
      • zwaldowski, on 05/11/2008, -4/+6How the hell can they be using GNOME icons? Look at the ***** screenshots first.
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1THE FIREFOX BUTTONS ARE USING GNOME ICONS OR COPYS.

          I looked over each of the screenshots.
        • idslite, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1copies*
  • rauz, on 05/11/2008, -1/+16Thousands of pixels wasted on superfluous padding, icons lacking a coherent theme (different use of metaphors, shadows coming from all directions etc), extremely tightly kerned text in tiny font sizes etc etc. I know the user can change these factors if he, or she, would like to (after all, it's Linux) but why not make the GUI look right from the start?
    • sinatosk, on 05/11/2008, -1/+1makes me wonder how they did what they did in fedora 8 to 9..... it's like they gone backwards or something...

      good distro though in my opinion... only problem I've had is compiling wine 0.9.59 to 1.0-rc1... bug with gcc and their repo is not updated past 0.9.58
  • Coestar, on 05/11/2008, -3/+8Is this even serious? These screenshots only show the (severely crippled) KDE desktop, while Fedora is a KDE/Gnome distro (stronger in Gnome right now). They aren't showing ***** here. You'd be better off just downloading the preview, doing a yum -y upgrade, and seeing for yourself.
  • patthew, on 05/11/2008, -18/+11What the ***** is this *****, I only want Ubuntu news on Digg!
  • tolbs, on 05/11/2008, -0/+10For the impatient (like me :) ), TPB has some torrents:
    http://thepiratebay.org/tor/4179354/Fedora-9-i386- ...
    http://thepiratebay.org/tor/4181147/Fedora_9_x86_6 ...

    haven't tried yet, good luck!
  • solidcube, on 05/11/2008, -8/+17It's funny to me that people are saying this looks bad. And something tells me they are Ubuntu fanboys. I am a Ubuntu fanboy too, but Ubuntu has the worst looking default desktop possible. The color scheme is absolutely repulsive, to the point where it almost makes me gag (who came up with that horrid flesh color?)
    • PaulRay, on 05/11/2008, -2/+5Johnson & Johnson?
      I'm also an ubuntu fan, I agree the stock colors are blech.
      But honestly, who leaves their stock desktop?
      • solidcube, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1well, you should be able to use a livecd or something without the colors being completely repellent. Even the default Windows95 desktop looked far nicer than the Ubuntu one. The ibis is a large improvement, as are the elephant skin papers, but still...
    • Mechanicat, on 05/11/2008, -6/+6You have something against brown skin, friend?
      • solidcube, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Yes I have something against brown skin. That's why I'm using Ubuntu, the linux made for africa. Get a life.
    • raydeen, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2I've been slowly getting used to the brown look. I just tell myself it's 'wood grained' like my old 2600. :D That would actually make a great theme. Instead of all the burnished metal and shiny plastic themes, we need a good ol' retro 70's wood grain.
    • Darkhacker, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3I use Xubuntu and I really like the default look for it. In fact I don't even know why people bother with regular Ubuntu. Xfce has nearly every feature that GNOME has and is more lightweight.
    • shotsman, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Spot On 'solidcube' The colours are also very hard for people with impaired vision to use. Thinks like a lack of contrast help in making the stock settings pretty naff if you ask me.
      The same (oh the irony) can be said about the Fedora 9 KDE theming. Fedora 8 was going in the right direction. Still, I'll wait until tomorrow, get the released ISO and do an install before I pass final judgment.
  • Kratos76, on 05/11/2008, -2/+5http://duggmirror.com
    (just testing it...)
    • Mechanicat, on 05/11/2008, -2/+4What?
      • altf4me, on 05/11/2008, -0/+7He's just testing it.
        • Mechanicat, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3I get that, but what da hell is he testing? It just links back to the digg home page.
          • altf4me, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2It provides a mirror of the submitted article. (You need to have referrals turned on in your browser for it to work)
  • krisscofield, on 05/11/2008, -10/+7"OMG the default is hideous! Buried!" People who have the know-how to operate Linux generally don't stick with the default desktop settings. This is the one thing people alway bash about Ubuntu, and it's silly. It's like complaining about the wallpaper of an OS.
    • MavRevMatt, on 05/11/2008, -2/+8That's not the point. If Linux ever wants to break into the market share of Windows and OS X it needs to look good. Most people don't change the defaults for appearance other than wallpapers and maybe some other things. This isn't the right way to think if Linux wants to go anywhere.
      • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2There are ton of different distros each to cover a multitude of needs and wants from their users. There is no desire on the part of the majority of those distributions to break into the market share of Windows or OS X with the notable exception of Ubuntu. And Ubuntu is doing a pretty good job of breaking into that market share.

        My preferred distro is Gentoo, because it gives me what I need:

        1. Access to tons and tons of software for the taking (non-pirated)
        2. Fine tuned customization of my installations with a pretty decent way to manage this for my desktops
        3. Forced learning of how things work at a deep level. Many of these learned things have helped me solve problems on other distros for other people as well as solving problems on Windows. This is something no other distro really excels at.
        4. A high level of customizability without the need to actually be a coder. I've built many custom systems for a variety of applications, all the while not knowing how to code anything.
        5. High performance for many applications. Higher in fact than my own custom modified version of RedHat 9 that I used before I jumped ship to Gentoo.

        With all that said, I completely accept that these things may not be beneficial to other people which would make my chosen distro a complete non-starter for them. Just as Ubuntu is not for me since it seems to completely negate the need to know your system inside and out since it tries to hide the underlying aspects of the distro from you.

        Your assertion that Linux needs to succeed in terms of monetary success is simply a knee-jerk reaction that is the result of years of conditioning by marketing people. Forget about monetary success. The only real thing of value in the world is immense knowledge about as many do-it-yourself things as your brain will hold. That's something you can take to the bank. Generally I agree with many posters here... KDE is fugly.
    • deadbaby, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5People are vain bitches. They WILL judge the entire OS by how the default theme looks. It's worth making some effort to at least offer a cohesive theme out of the box.
  • Coestar, on 05/11/2008, -0/+8For those who are asking, the screenshots feature the DEFAULT look for KDE4. Fedora's Gnome implementation is a much better working environment right now, equal to Ubuntu's Gnome. I tried using KDE4 as a workspace via Kubuntu for awhile and it was absolutely awful. If you want to see a KDE4 implementation that isn't awful, you could try the latest Suse, but I couldn't gut using that one on a daily basis either.
  • DuffyDirect, on 05/11/2008, -9/+5on digg, ubuntu and obama are like lamb and tuna fish
    • MavRevMatt, on 05/11/2008, -2/+4WTF?
    • Whackly, on 05/11/2008, -0/+6This comment is like a mule with a spinning wheel...
      • Disease, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Or an anteater wearing a sweater....
        • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1Or an American with a British accent. Oh wait... Madonna.
  • jasarien, on 05/11/2008, -11/+3Why are people still digging this when the site is as dead as a dodo?
  • GOVATENT, on 05/11/2008, -7/+3I used to prefer working on red hat back in the days then moved on to fedora when RH went corporate. Then my brother started using ubuntu, or debian in general. I don't know why but I stuck with debian.
    • Mechanicat, on 05/11/2008, -2/+3Once you go debian, you don't go back!
  • oomfoofoo, on 05/11/2008, -9/+11To the people complaining that KDE4 looks like crap in F9. That's because there's no such thing as KDE in F9, there's Gnome & Knome. Knome is actually Gnome that looks like KDE. Fedora has a long history of treating KDE users like second-class citizens.
    • PaulRay, on 05/11/2008, -4/+13KDE users ARE second class citizens.


      I kid I kid!! :oP
    • tama00, on 05/11/2008, -5/+4Fedora use to be all about KDE! They only started using Gnome when Ubuntu became very popular and everyone started to love gnome more. But i remember using Fedora alot back about 3-6 years ago and every release was KDE. So there hasnt been a long history of it, just a short one. ;)
      • webcrumb, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1Wha? Redhat has always been focussed on GNOME (I believe they lead the development of it). Then Mandrake branched to use KDE. As far as I know, Fedora has always carried on with the Redhat way of doing things... certainly Core 3 was Gnome (IIRC).
    • rlbond86, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3KDE works fine on Fedora 8.
  • HumanRecall, on 05/11/2008, -7/+6Man KDE hasn't chnaged it's look at all it looks as ugly as ever !!

    O Linux what has happpend to you to not grow in features and looks? it's been years yet your growth ha sbeen stunted :(
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/11/2008, -5/+4KDE has prettier than Gnome. Gnome is more functional.
      • srg13, on 05/12/2008, -2/+3I think that these screenshots prove the first bit of your statement very wrong...
        • talonstriker, on 05/13/2008, -1/+1I use KDE4. The looks aren't much but it "feels" much better to use it. You really have to try it to know...
  • Rubio, on 05/11/2008, -4/+3I really don't get what's so special about it...
    And since when have widgets become the "it" application? It seems like every OS simply has to have a huge analog clock or a weather applet. People need to start being a little more creative and think outside the box...
    • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3I agree. The whole idea actually came from the Mac back in the early 80s. You had these little apps you could load into the system to access from the Apple menu that were always running. The key was, they had to be small, and they had to do something useful but not be a full blown application.

      Since Apple has had this for nearly 20 years, it's only fitting that their recent revamp on the idea (moving to the widget model and assigning them a system hotkey) is as stylish and efficient as ever. Microsoft then aped the idea, while completely missing the clue boat that the Widgets shouldn't be visible until the user MAKES them visible. It looks like KDE4 has gone a similar route to Windows. I'm hoping that Gnome will follow the Apple model and force these things to remain hidden until you hotkey them to the foreground, then make them disappear once again. However... no matter how you look at it, this is not a new idea. I was using "Desktop Accessories" on my trusty old Atari ST back in the 80s.
  • deadbaby, on 05/11/2008, -1/+12If you like classy, professional, looking themes check these out:
    http://analog-paint.blogspot.com/2008/05/classy-gn ...
    http://analog-paint.blogspot.com/2008/05/classy-gn ...

    • webcrumb, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Holy crap, a blog link that was both useful, and not spam?

      What's happening?

      [/scared]
  • scilec, on 05/11/2008, -1/+9I realize that this is about the upcoming release of Fedora 9, but I have a few grievances about KDE 4 that I just have to share...
    As a long-time Fedora / KDE user, I've been playing with KDE 4 on both Kubuntu and Fedora distros. While I realize that KDE 4 is still a "work in progress", I would seriously hope that the KDE team is taking a good, hard look at making some serious cosmetic changes. My biggest complaint about KDE 4 is that everything is just too... big. The default theme that's installed with KDE 4 has a way of even making the desktop on my wide-screen monitor feel claustrophobic. Furthermore, I absolutely hate the new Vista-like start menu, which forces you to visually navigate your application tree one branch at a time. One of the first things I did after installing KDE 4 was to install the old KDE 3-style kicker menu. As a devoted KDE user, I sincerely hope that the dev/design teams work out some of these issues quickly.
    • talonstriker, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1I agree and the desktop icons--get rid of the stupid background highlight and the annoying icons that popup. There's a right click for a reason. But overall, the theme and the "feel" of KDE4 is alright.
      /kubuntu user
  • InorganicMatter, on 05/11/2008, -2/+5I haven't use a Red Hat based Desktop OS in a while, might have to try this. KDE4 looks VERY nicely done, but we shall see how it compares to the latest (amazing) OpenSUSE 11 KDE4 implementation.
    • tolbs, on 05/11/2008, -0/+5i wouldn't give KDE a further look then a spin through a VMware image....It's really, really unstable..promising...but very unstable.
  • 3leggedHorse, on 05/11/2008, -8/+2Not nice.
  • b3n87, on 05/11/2008, -2/+8so how is it a "leak" when its open source and publicly available all the time?
    • brocruit, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1No joke dude! I take leak in public all the time and no one says a thing!
  • cmost, on 05/11/2008, -4/+8Wow, KDE 4 is really, really ugly!! As a former KDE user who switched to Gnome about two years ago, I can't understand why the KDE community is under the impression that their userbase has eyesight problems. Why are the icons, the taskbar and just everything so damn BIG in KDE 4? To make matters worse, very few prefer dark themes so why is that the default? It's clear that KDE is trying to fix Vista by copying what it thinks are Vista's good points (they're wrong) and then re-inventing the desktop wheel from there. It's not working folks. While KDE 4 may eventually end up being a great desktop experience, it's making me want to vomit right now. I'll stick with Gnome. While Gnome may pander to the "users are idiots" mentality, at least the Gnome desktop is clean and professional looking instead of looking as though it were designed by Fisher-Price.
    • amightywind, on 05/11/2008, -2/+4So true. KDE had a childish look to it 10 years ago, and it still does now.
  • kingp, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3Inaccurate. Even the blogger said he got it early because of a misconfigured server in Europe. Fedora 9 isn't released for 2 more days.
  • surreal1111, on 05/11/2008, -0/+7can we please ditch the windows95 rip off interface? there are better ways to design a UI... whatever happened to enlightenment.org at least that had an alternative and damn pretty method..
  • amightywind, on 05/11/2008, -13/+5It looks blue, just like the old one. Yawn. You should use a real distribution - Gentoo.
    • hellotyler, on 05/11/2008, -3/+2Yeah, then your OS can look like Windows!
    • Darkhacker, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5You'll waste days compiling your OS and applications just to brag to middle schoolers on the internet that you use a "real" distribution? Yeah, keep stroking that e-penis.
      • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -4/+5Let's see...

        1. Use of the idiotic term "e-penis"? Check!
        2. No real understanding of that which poster is commenting on? Check!
        3. A history of posting useless and worthless comment to Digg? Check!

        Folks I think we have what is known as a douchebag here names "Darkhacker". Why don't you go learn something about Gentoo before spreading the usual ***** you read on internet forums? Go back to *BSD or whatever godforsaken wasteland you came from.
        • Darkhacker, on 05/12/2008, -2/+10I wasn't trashing Gentoo (a fine distribution by the way) but his assertion that Gentoo is a "real" distribution while Fedora is not. Just like I also wanted to reply to your comment about BSD being a "godforsaken wasteland". To use your words, Why don't you learn something about BSD before spreading the usual ***** you read on internet forums?
          • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -2/+2I've used OpenBSD, and FreeBSD. (Granted it's been about three years now and maybe they've stepped into the 90s by now) My experience with both (and I REALLY wanted to like OpenBSD because of its default security) was that they were missing applications and functionality that I consider to be essential for the desktop. (Yeah yeah... I know they're not supposed to be for the desktop, but neither is Linux and it accommodates the desktop quite well without treating an advanced user like an idiot. Which is why I hate Ubuntu.)

            Logical Volume Manager in BSD? Nope. Not in 2005. That is one of THE most valuable pieces of kernel functionality and BSD lacked it. Not only they, but BSD has that idiotic dual partitioning scheme that feels like it's from 1970. Why do you need to partition twice and WHY would anyone in their right mind want to be limited to a maximum of four partitions on a drive? LVM does away with all of that. You can slice up your space six ways to Sunday which is particularly useful when you're virtualizing the majority of your machines. At home, not at work.

            Speaking of virtualization... it took much longer for BSD to jump on that concept. And again, it's an essential if you're someone like me who loves the flexibility of not being tied to hardware. You simply move your machines "souls" around or even distribute them amongst multiple machines. As far as I'm concerned... using Xen + LVM + NX + PulseAudio + SANE over the network allows my machines to live wherever they need to at the moment. There's no such thing as "Oh I can't do this because only my other hardware can". Need to do a scan from my virtual desktop but the scanner is on the other machine? No problem with networked SANE (yes this can be done from BSD but it illustrates the point that BSD users seem to miss). I want to watch a DVD from an image file on the big HD monitor on the living room wall, but I don't want it to come out of the speakers and all the AV gear (Linux based custom PVR, Amplifier, satellite tuner, etc...) is all in the basement with the headphone jack? No problem with PulseAudio. Just send the audio stream to the laptop on next to me on the coffee table. I have a big number crunching video processing job to run, but the box the VM is running on isn't powerful enough to do it quickly? No problem, just use Xen's live migration to move the VM to a more powerful box. Not only that, but I can throw more RAM at it too. WHILE the virtual machine is running the entire time. No reboots.

            When BSD can offer functionality like that, you know, the kind of functionality that most power users want? THEN, I'll give it another shot. I tried booting the DesktopBSD distro in an HVM (Xen's hardware assisted virtualization mode), but it failed to even install. How very OS/2 Warp...
          • Darkhacker, on 05/13/2008, -2/+1So in other words, you couldn't figure out BSD, therefore it sucks? BSD is not Linux, so don't bitch and whine when it does stuff differently. "But but but... that's not how Linux does it!"
          • VinceNoir, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2@Darkhacker

            No. BSD does things wrong (in my opinion). If it works for you great. But don't go around insulting people because they prefer a certain distro or OS. I sensed a BSD-ite in you, so I targeted that to give you a dose of what you gave the original poster. It wasn't pleasant, was it? So stop doing it to other people.

            BSD is fine if your needs are limited to what it can do. For me, it doesn't work. My needs are more advanced. That's why Gentoo is the best choice for me. Nearly all Redhat based distros fail for my needs. I can use them, probably much better than most people in fact. I just don't like their approach at all. I want power and control, and I can get that with Gentoo. So for me... Gentoo is a "real" distro. The others are just lame. But that's all based on my particular needs. If I was a different kind of person, I might feel that way about... ew... Windows.
          • Darkhacker, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2I had to beat it out of you, but you finally admit that your dislike of BSD is an opinion and not gospel truth.

            "But don't go around insulting people because they prefer a certain distro or OS"

            Excuse me? Wasn't that the entire reason I was posting in the first place was because you two Gentoo fanatics were trashing other distros for not being "real"?

            "I sensed a BSD-ite in you"

            You sensed wrong. There was nothing in my post that even so much as hinted as to what OS I use (It's not BSD by the way).

            "I targeted that to give you a dose of what you gave the original poster. It wasn't pleasant, was it? So stop doing it to other people."

            I don't even use BSD. You came to some backwards-ass conclusion that I used BSD because I suggested that Fedora was just as valid of a distribution as Gentoo. How you got that conclusion, I don't know. I find it *extremely* ironic that you trash BSD given how Gentoo lifted the idea of a Ports collection directly from BSD. If you aren't able to use it correctly under BSD, how am I supposed to believe that you would gain any real benefit to using it under Linux? I think this page is a little more appropriate for you... http://funroll-loops.info/
          • VinceNoir, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Wow. You don't get it at all. Sure Portage is based on it, but it's nothing like it these days. And yes... I've been to the funroll-loops.info site. I find it more than a little amusing since most of the people involved there are as idiotic as the people they believe exist.
        • brocruit, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4I've used Gentoo. It takes forever to compile ESPECIALLY if you want gnome/kde to work. I also post useless comments and don't feel bad about it because your comment is no more useful. BTW I stroke my real penis... but its detachable, which can sometimes be a pain in the ass.
          • VinceNoir, on 05/12/2008, -2/+1Glad to hear about the detacher there King Missile...
    • rlbond86, on 05/12/2008, -1/+6I wanted to make a joke, but it's still compiling.
  • ErikDaRed, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1It's a shame that no distribution has really taken the time to customize KDE4. Most distros (including Ubuntu) are just using the default setup for KDE4: no custom themes, no distro-specific improvements, nothing. The only distro i've seen that has differentiated its KDE4 offering from the others is openSUSE.

    Hopefully with the release of KDE4.1 we will see more than just the default setup offered on most distros.
  • SpookyET, on 05/11/2008, -9/+4Fedora is too enterprise. For most desktops, it's worthless. I have tried Fedora 8. SELinux drove me nuts. I'm using Arch Linux now.
    • Jammerdelray, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3How is Fedora useless for the desktop? Has the same Gnome Ubuntu has.
      • brocruit, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Yes! I love SameGnome! I COULD PLAY THAT FOR HOURS!
    • anyweb, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1you do know that you can disable selinux during setup, infact it's one of the installation questions....
  • Jammerdelray, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2I have Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron all setup but there are issues with Pulse Audio that have to be worked out, Since Fedora has had it longer than Ubuntu I may switch.
  • KevinJim, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4I love KDE 4.0.x but I really really HATE Kickoff !
  • Cherubim, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3KDE 3.5.9 looks much better than 4.xx and is also a lot more stable. How on earth did they get things so wrong with this new implementation of KDE ? I switched from Ubuntu/Gnome to Kubuntu 8.04 and opted for the 3.5.9 desktop. For the most part I'm quite pleased although some hardware is not detected properly (eg. webcam). I don't like the way KDE has morphed and unless they make some radical changes in 4.x then I won't bother with it.
  • thestaton, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2What is Sulphur and what's so great about it?
  • FalkenAX3, on 05/11/2008, -3/+2Looks like a gnome version of the default vista skin...
    • nxtwrld, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1It looks more like Clearlooks gnome theme that's been whith us for more than 5 years...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.