What is Digg?176 Comments
- dicerandom, on 10/30/2007, -9/+86Am I the only one who thinks that there are many, many GTK & Emerald themes that are far more attractive than OS X or Vista? What's with people and trying to copy them?
- specialK16, on 11/12/2007, -11/+44Yeah, Linux is too good to be like OS X.
- dougbarrett, on 10/30/2007, -6/+35Even if you aren't a fan of OSX, think of what this is. In less than half an hour, it's a transformation from a searingly vanilla theme to making it resemble a theme that artists spent months designing. Sure it lacks the functionality of OSX, but it shows the true customization of Linux. I'm sure that making Vista look like OSX would require downloading a whole new windows manager (Windowsblinds or something.)
Once Linux starts getting some true artists on the platform, then the posibilities of artwork combined with the never ending stability and improvements made to Linux could start to make people think twice about purchasing a system OS again. - kmenzel, on 10/30/2007, -11/+40Wait... why would you want that functionality? It's TERRIBLE in any multi-monitor setup (at least if done in the MacOS style of forcing the menu to the primary monitor) - and even when you are running multiple windows on the same screen it separates functionality of the program from the program window, increasing mouse travel time for most menu operations... it's possible the worst "feature" of MacOS - designed to save on screen real-estate back in the days before you could multi-task...
- redmaxx, on 10/30/2007, -1/+19The mind boggles...comments that attack OS X on Digg...it cannot be!
- russellnation, on 10/30/2007, -2/+19gee when are they gonna show me how to make my linux look like linux
- JonForTheWin, on 10/30/2007, -2/+16Gnome and KDE don't need to imitate the other desktops, they have their own thing going.
These mac and windows packs tend to get pretty lame pretty fast. - Ademan, on 10/30/2007, -0/+12Clearly it's a matter of preference, but clearlooks based themes and murrine based themes all look infinitely better (to me) than any osx or windows theme i've seen. Also my current theme (engine) is acutally human, but with the "glossy" theme so that it's a cool blue instead of turd brown/barf orange.
(just to clarify there are two parts to any given gtk+ "theme" the theme engine, which is actual code, contained in a shared object, and the theme itself which dictates parameters for the theme engine, usually things like color, "roundness", "shininess", contrast, turn animation on or off, that sort of thing, in this way gtk+ can have themes that are both fast (being mostly hard coded) and reuse much of that code for different themes through the use of the theme files (gtkrc files) to dictate parameters for the engines)
I only say this because i mentioned the human theme engine, where there are two main (many more that aren't shipped with ubuntu) themes, human, which is the brown and orange, and glossy, which still uses the same code, but gives it a blue look, this setup kinda confused me in the beginning, so i figured i'd explain it... (ok i'm done) - colincornaby, on 10/30/2007, -2/+13"more like putting lipstick on a stallion ;)" I'm an OS X guy, but I'll freely admit Linux is a fine alternative. I just made a joke, and it's good to see that it seems Linux people have a sense of humor. :)
- Gerbil_Juice, on 10/30/2007, -0/+11Saying OS X is based on BSD is more accurate.
- northernmunky, on 10/30/2007, -1/+12Or is it a Macintux?
- prammy, on 10/30/2007, -0/+10The murrina themes are pretty damn good. Nice and clean.
- northernmunky, on 10/30/2007, -0/+9It's a Linuxtosh!
- freebasen, on 11/13/2007, -4/+13While I applaud the effort I think many non-Mac users miss the point. The OS is fine and dandy, but truth be told I can get similar if not superior performance on the OS/Utilities side of things from Linux. Yet, I choose to run OS X. Why? The reason is simple. A unified GUI and behavior guidelines for the -Apps-. This is what I feel Linux really lacks, and what I hope more development time will be geared towards in the future.
- inactive, on 10/30/2007, -7/+16WTF is wrong with you mactards digg him down. he has a very very valid point.
- wilhel1812, on 10/30/2007, -2/+11nah... i have 7.10 running on my mac
- nanostream, on 10/30/2007, -0/+8And without the supreme bugginess
- specialK16, on 10/30/2007, -1/+9Many months ago I read about a patch for Gnome that would make application menus to be like in OS X, in the top bar. Too bad this Mac4Lin project is not working on that.
- inactive, on 10/30/2007, -1/+9Ubuntu Type-R adds 400 mhz to your PC from professional grade adhesive case mods. Great for drifting!
- Ademan, on 10/30/2007, -0/+8Well the linux community is very fragmented, different people want different things out of their desktop, for instance the KDE people enjoy throwing as much functionality into one window as possible, wheras the GNOME people want to hide most of the functionality (this is a major oversimplification of the issue). But if you ask me, within GNOME and within KDE there is a lot of continuity. GNOME has it's own human interface guideline, and I assume KDE has one as well, and as far as i can tell, most gnome apps follow the gnome interface guideline and most KDE apps function similarly as well (probably more similarly than between GNOME apps, for better or worse (i'd say worse, but i'm talking out of my ass here) ). The problem arises in two or three places.
1. GNOME and KDE apps mixing.
2. unaffiliated Gtk+ apps mixing with GNOME apps and unaffiliated Qt apps mixing with KDE apps
3. everything else, there are so many damn ways to make a GUI there are a lot of useful apps out there that are neither Qt nor Gtk+, like fltk based, tk/tcl based, straight up Xlib based, motif based, and so on, and this goes pretty far to fragment the look and feel of the interfaces, and generally that implies they function differently as well. - neko, on 10/30/2007, -0/+8People try to copy them because people want that look. Other people don't because they don't.
Linux: It's made by people. - neko, on 10/30/2007, -1/+8Nice, detailed guide.
And for all the people asking "why?": Because people want to. Duh. - mrsteveman1, on 11/02/2007, -6/+13Thats just one of the annoying things about OS X that Apple has decided to force on users, and who could forget the close/minimize/zoom buttons on the left side of the window, as small as possible and impossible to hit quickly, and zoom is absolutely worthless and barely ever works right. Working in OS X quickly is painful even before you get anything done.
- inactive, on 10/30/2007, -3/+10These guys will never get sued.
- colincornaby, on 10/30/2007, -29/+36It's like painting a Honda Civic Ferrari Red!
- ljubomir, on 10/30/2007, -1/+7Or switch to KDE. They had it (the real deal, not the hack thingy) for 7 years, or so ;)
- Ademan, on 10/30/2007, -3/+9Er, how is this linux copying apple? First of all linux isn't even an entity of it's own, second of all this is a team of people (probably more like 3 people) who wanted to imitate osx's look and feel because they like the way it looks. team of 3 people != linux community as a whole.
- prammy, on 10/30/2007, -1/+7Drop shadows and transparency? Enlightenment had that before OS X did. And this was in 1998 or 1999. Granted the terminal transparency was not true transparency but the effect was still there. Besides these 2 things are not really copyable. Anyone with light, a piece of paper and a glass which is transparent has seen those effects.
As far as desktop search goes, didn't google come out with Google desktop before OS X? Unless you mean Apple was the first to ship an OS with it but thats not very ground breaking either. - inactive, on 10/30/2007, -1/+7>Sure it lacks the functionality of OSX
Linux is much more functional than OSX - ucg1, on 10/30/2007, -0/+6In Linux/UNIX window managers you have a choice of how you want things to look. With OS X you are forced to stick with one look and behavior. It gets really old and boring after a while. I wouldn't want the same tired look in on my Linux desktops, too.
- inactive, on 10/30/2007, -3/+8Gutsy Gibbon is based on Linux.
- andycr512, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5The download for the icons says "do not use unless you own a copy of OSX."
- antdude, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5I'd kiss him.:P
- GMorgan, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5Linux is designed to allow the user to assert whatever policy they choose. Even retarded ones like OSX.
- TeacherOfHeroes, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5Maybe he doesn't enjoy the mac aesthetic?
- DudleyInnocent, on 11/02/2007, -5/+10OS X is based on Unix.
Big difference. - nanostream, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5lol raw linux
- Ramble, on 10/30/2007, -4/+9OS X is based on FreeBSD, not Unix.
- kaiserollofdoom, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5Isn't the whole point of having a completely open source OS is to customize and tweak it to the way you want it?
- PainToad, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4I use to try to make my XP machine look like Mac...but Ubuntu is sexy enough thanks
- inactive, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4I can somewhat agree with you on this. Having to listen to the XP "Ding!" or "Welcome" coming from a Intel MacBook _IS_ wrong.
On the other hand, making Linux look like Vista almost down to the nitty-gritty visuals, only by far better, is really quite fun in its satiristical way! - schestowitz, on 11/02/2007, -8/+12For KDE users: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=8 ...
- bratterscain, on 10/31/2007, -1/+5So that was your pic on Digg of you hiding your horse porn?
- xevidentx, on 10/30/2007, -2/+6simple... because they are mactards
- arjie, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4Actually, the funny thing is, the people it is being marketed to are buying it. That's assuming that the companies you were talking about were Red Hat and Novell?
Besides, you haven't really made a point. It's too vague to actually be helpful. It's sort of like a useless bug report which goes, "A bug exists." - arjie, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4I thought the whole plan was for it to follow Fitt's Law. You can actually set that functionality pretty easily on KDE. I think it's nice, except that if one window's got focus you have to switch focus manually before you use the other window's menu. However, if you're running something in full screen this is rather nice, because it's easy to hit the top, you don't have to 'aim'. The top-left and top-right are real easy places to hit, so it makes getting to them much faster.
Anyway, I've gotten used to the old way of doing things so I'm on GNOME with my menus inside my windows. Especially since I have 'focus follows mouse', so if there's another window on the way to the top bar it will grab focus as I go over it, thereby making the menu change. - inactive, on 10/30/2007, -3/+7when the hell did vista copy OSX?
- Ademan, on 11/02/2007, -5/+8Well, the BSD family IS based on unix, and is generally regarded as unix... so, whatever...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 179 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is