Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
KDE GUI

An Alternative Look for KDE 50

An anonymous reader writes: "I'm a huge OS X/Gnome fan, but still highly respect the KDE project. I still try and keep up with it's developments and recently came across this posting on KDELook which proposed a totally new GUI design for KDE, which I think could be quite easily adopted in other environments as well. A rolling Slashdot discussion I think would help keep the open-source innovation going. Thoughts?" Update: 11/27 20:12 GMT by T : Amended to give credit where due, which in this case is to the anonymous submitter :)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

An Alternative Look for KDE

Comments Filter:
  • ARRRRGH (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by devphil ( 51341 )


    Since when does copying the XP rounded-edges candy-colored-icons count as "totally new GUI design"?

    Please, if people what to copy the XP look-and-squeal, then we can (and should, and do) have particular themes to do exactly that. But this doesn't strike me as innovation.

    Making the not-kicker-thingy expand as needed is an interesting tweak. But the rest is just more #*!% copying.

    (I wonder what a desktop that actually looked like a desktop would do for ease of use? Hmmm. Have to give that some thought.)

    • Didn't Star Trek, TNG, coin it?

      Or was it the game Simon... the memory game..

      or maybe it was the 70's?

      I doubt XP did it first ;P
    • Re:ARRRRGH (Score:2, Insightful)

      by iangoldby ( 552781 )
      Forget the pixel-shading. The point of it seems to be the functionality, not the exact appearance. From that perspective, it does look like a nice idea. It would require a lot of reworking of almost all applications though.
    • Re:ARRRRGH (Score:2, Insightful)

      by purplebear ( 229854 )
      How is this copying XP? I am working on a XP system right now, and I see no resemblance.
      This concept is a new idea in the taskbar, menu, tray utilities layout. It appears to me that this would make the desktop a much more usable and informative space.
      I do agree with one poster at KDE Look that this should be a separate project from KDE core. It should be some type of plugable kicker replacement.
      All in all, I would love to use a desktop based on this concept. It IS quite innovative compared to today's desktops.
    • Re:ARRRRGH (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ivan256 ( 17499 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @02:58PM (#4769721)
      That's not what I saw at all. This totally elimintated the traditional "windows-like" taskbar in favor of things that were like "cards" that could be mostly slid past the edge of the screen when not in use. Also, each of these "cards" could have embedded applets. It's nothing like the Windows GUI, or anything else for that matter.

      If you ask me, the whole thing still takes up too many pixels. I'm still desktop-less since I can't bring myself to spend the screen space. What I need is something like these "screenshots," but that disappears completely unless you're holding down the 'Alt' key or something.
      • You can't bring yourself to spend 1cm of screen real estate, at the *bottem* of the screen?!?! I will refrain from asking the size of your monitor. By the way, I'm fairly certain that both gnome and kde allow you to completly hide the kicker. It pops up when you move your mouse to the very bottem edge of the screen. ;)
        • Did you read his post? He says he only wants it to show when he holds down the alt-key, not use the mouse. He is far to l33t to use the mouse to bring it up, as is quite evident. :)
        • You can't bring yourself to spend 1cm of screen real estate, at the *bottem* of the screen?!?! I will refrain from asking the size of your monitor.

          I have 2 Dell P1110 20" monitors. I use Sawfish as a window manager, and a borderless theme. Yep, that's right. I'm so stingy with the pixels that I don't even use them for a border or window decorations. Now do you see why I'm reluctant to run an auto-hiding panel?

          Here's a screenshot [spineless.org] of my terminals screen if you're interested. It's the one with the most root window visable, but only because I happen to have the gimp running right now and I narrowed down one of the terminals for it to fit. I've also got a virtual desktop for my browser and e-mail, and another with emacs and more terminals. Keep in mind that I'm not advocating something like this for anybody else... I don't use anything like this on my home machine. Only on my work machine where the number and locations of windows I have open is almost completely constant. (I run Windows 2000 at home...)
          • LOL! Wow. Ok. Your right, you really are stingy with pixels. ;) You are the definition of special case I think. :)

            I guess I can sort of understand, sometimes I like to run my unix machines really thin as well. Of course not THAT thin. Hehe, that's just crazy man! :)

          • Hi, I just wanted to ask, which version of The GIMP are you running in that screenshot? Is it from current CVS?

            Thanks
      • It's nothing like the Windows GUI, or anything else for that matter.

        To me, it looked a lot like the popup folders on MacOS 8 & 9. Those things sure came in handy. I would like to add them to my desktop (but not replace kicker).

    • (I wonder what a desktop that actually looked like a desktop would do for ease of use? Hmmm. Have to give that some thought.)

      It's been tried a number of times. Two of the most successful attempts are Microsoft Bob [toastytech.com] and MagicCap OS [rr.com] (which was targeted for PDAs).

      While it might be done in a more useful way, both Bob and MagicCap weren't terribly user-friendly. They're both very cumbersome.
    • I didn't make the icons.

      would you like to show us your obviously superior designs?

      I only did it because most none linux users I know (and there's a hell of a lot of them) have commented on how the KDE desktop just looks like an amateur verson of windows.

      if you think it looks like XP then you really aren't looking. OK it might have some similarities to desktop environments I havent used or seen for that I will be for ever sorry.

      Lets just keep Linux for the elite, I'm really glad its not popular as a desktop environment I feel sooooo special.

  • by Otter ( 3800 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @03:03PM (#4769761) Journal
    I'm not a big GNOME desktop person, so I may be wrong about this, but isn't the overall effect a lot like when the power GNOME users put several specialized panels all over the desktop?

    My own taste prefers a single hierarchical menu for launching applications, some system monitors and not much else. For that reason, my preferred desktops are classic MacOS and WindowMaker. (I keep meaning to test utilities to give me Apple menu type launching in OS X -- the dock feels so restrictive and cluttered.) But, it's nice to see people thinking about real alternatives.

  • It made me think about Squeak/Smalltalk [squeak.org] except that in Squeak it is called flaps and when expanded they look like the standard kicker ie it takes all the width when the flap was attached to the bottom or top of the screen.

    The card idea is great !
    • Ah, I was thinking about that too, but wasn't planning on mentioning it.

      I am kind of like on of those emacs freaks, but with Squeak. I use Squeak basically as my computing environment, using the Squeak web browser, email client, irc client and xterm/telnet client for the bulk of my computing activities.

      I have my environment setup to use these flaps. You can toggle whether you want the flaps to expand on mouse over or on clicking the flap. I put my email client in a flap, having it nicely tucked away, but immediately accessible. When I'm doing real work (e.g. programming), I will put my IRC session in one as well. I have a number of other tools I put in flaps that do auto-hiding depending on what I'm doing.

      So no, this KDE concept thing is nothing new to some of us. :)
      • I am kind of like on of those emacs freaks, but with Squeak. I use Squeak basically as my computing environment, using the Squeak web browser, email client, irc client and xterm/telnet client for the bulk of my computing activities.

        Gaaaah. How do you stand it? I couldn't go ten minutes in squeak without wondering how to access some really basic functions. Then I found The Menu That Ate Cleveland, which gave me too much to deal with. Then I end up dismembering most applications with the amazing feature of being able to rip widgets out of running apps, and like humpty, couldn't get them back together again. I felt like every minute I went I was breaking things a little more each time. Don't get me started on the disaster that is halos, or the total unusability from the keyboard.

        I mean it's impressively malleable, but what can I really *do* with it?
  • a few thoughts (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bay43270 ( 267213 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @03:15PM (#4769849) Homepage
    Overall, I like it a lot, but I have a few notes:

    - I don't understand why the term and home buttons are on the clock panel. Both are simply shortcuts to applications and should go on the quick launch.
    - If the task bar is on the upper left, then where does a screen maximize to? Does the taskbar cover part of the frame (I hope so, or it might as well cover the entire top of the screen). If it does overlap the top of a maximized frame, then all controls will have to be on the right for this to be usable.
    - Static screen shots don't show the interaction well. Will there be a lot of OSX-ish animation. I would suggest a minimal amount of flash. It seems to fit the *nix crowd better (everyone wants to run it on their 90mhz p1), and it would set it appart from XP and OSX.

    It has a very clean and simple look, (which everyone always likes but we rarely see in a finished product). I hope, if this does take off, it remains clean and simple.
    • Re:a few thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sweetooth ( 21075 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @03:21PM (#4769898) Homepage
      I don't see any need to try and please a particular crowd. When creating something new and innovative it's very easy to fall back into old habits to please certain users. The interface should have useability in mind first and foremost.

      Things like animation and flashy graphics are eye candy that appeal to many people even the "Unix Crowd." If that weren't the case Enlightenment would never have been so popular and many of the things it did wouldn't have carried over into other window managers. The key is that those items can be enabled/disabled. That way those that like flashy work environments can have them and those, like yourself, that don't like flash don't have to deal with it.
    • Static screen shots don't show the interaction well. Will there be a lot of OSX-ish animation. I would suggest a minimal amount of flash. It seems to fit the *nix crowd better (everyone wants to run it on their 90mhz p1), and it would set it appart from XP and OSX.

      That crowd of people wouldn't be using KDE 2 or 3 in the first place, which is quite slow, even with minimal animations. Yes, it would be nice to have a fancy-pants desktop that works well on a 90 MHz P5, but it seems to be a bit of a pipe dream to build something that is super-fast on top of a slow foundation.
  • by PinkX ( 607183 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @03:21PM (#4769897) Homepage
    I really hope that this project gets all the attention it deserves, and becomes the new 'de-facto' look for KDE.

    I am not a big fan of desktop environments (I use AfterStep [afterstep.org] alone), but this idea shows a big improvement over the rather old and boring start-menu-taskbar model of win95/NT4/98/me/2k/xp, GNOME and current KDE.

    It really shows innovation, and moving away from what is already stablished cannot be anything but a good thing.
  • Stunned In Awe (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MBCook ( 132727 ) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @03:30PM (#4769947) Homepage
    Wow. What more is there to say? It's very clean and nice looking. I really wasn't expecting much, I mean how often do new ideas for how to make a desktop actually work? But this really looks like it would work well. Like I said, it's clean. It reminds me of aqua, but "less", which is a good thing. I've got to say that if this doesn't make it into KDE, I hope someone makes a new window manager that uses this idea, it looks handy. I've been useing WM lately because it uses less resources on my little system, and I've got to say that I really like it. If my system was more powerfull, with things the way they are today, I would probably stick with WM. But if my system were morepowerfull, I'd be willing to switch over to that system. I'm sorry that I don't quite know how to describe my reaction. It seems like a very intelligent evolution that would be very functional and doesn't clutter things up. I'd love to give it a try.

    PS: As for comments like "Why is copying WinXP by rounding things considdered new?", it's not. The fact that the edges are rounded is NOT the point, that wouldn't be new. Why don't you try looking at the forest once in a while. That said, I think that rounded things look better than square boxes. The use of curves instead of straight lines seems natural now that graphics cards are better equipped to deal with it than they were back in Win 3.x days.


    • PS: As for comments like "Why is copying WinXP by rounding things considdered new?", it's not. The fact that the edges are rounded is NOT the point, that wouldn't be new.

      Sure, the rounded edges are "k3wl d3wd", but I think they hurt usability. They make pointing and clicking more difficult (for the user AND the CPU!) because the clickable surface is a strange shape.
      • Re:Stunned In Awe (Score:3, Interesting)

        by sweetooth ( 21075 )
        How is it more difficult for the user? The buttons are not external to the curve? They are inset a bit away from the curve and are clearly defined. The fact that the buttons are curved should have no effect on the users experience. If users have a hard time clicking, then those particular users may not be well suited to using computers.

        The only thing that drives me nuts is when because of the pretty shapes the window borders become excessivly large as with Windows XP. I don't want my title bar to take up 100 pixels because it is some odd shape.

        I think size and not shape is the issue to be concerned about. Too small and people might have a harder time clicking on it or reading information on it. Too big and it becomes a severe waste of space. Especially on smaller monitors.

        CPU useage is a valid concern, however most modern desktop environments/window managers/display servers have code optimized to draw these types of widgets and often pass the dirty work on to the video card leaving the CPU to do other things. The average Joe with an $800 Gateway/Dell computer still has more processor power than they probaby need, and will not notice the fact that a few extra cycles are being used to draw curved window edges.
    • Wow. What more is there to say?

      There's at least one more thing to say: This is not real.

      It's a mockup. It doesn't exist. This is someone's idea of what they want Kicker to look like. Unfortunately, they haven't implemented it in code. Heck, they haven't even implemented it in Javascript, so we can't even test it out to see if it's even usable.
  • by EnVisiCrypt ( 178985 ) <{moc.liamtoh} {ta} {tsiroehtevoorg}> on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @03:41PM (#4770045)
    After the author's initial revisions, this is a pretty spectacular redesign.

    I would really love to see something like this implemented for Linux.

    While the core theory behind the design is *really* good, I would eliminate the extraneous application elements. The quicklaunch above the K menu should go, and the quicklaunch on the right should be used instead. The slideout on the right should be what the card application for "information center" launches from. The taskbar on the upper left should be open by default, hidden on the click of the arrow. I don't think the cards should be activated on mouseover, the behaviour should be:

    If !ontop{
    focus
    hideothers
    }
    expand

    All in all, the card concept is great, and this design would be a much needed ideological break from OS X and XP. I've heard some grumblings that it will "confuse windows lusers", and "we need to keep the old style for windows to linux converts!". Remember though, users don't need the operation of the interface to be immediately apparent, it need only be easily learned and consistent, which is a common failing of Linux applications/desktops. It would help to think of usability as "learnability" instead of idiot-proofing, a la Jakob Nielsen.

    • Its simple, let the distribution make the interface look like windows.

      Anyone who wants it to look like this should be able to setup their KDE to look like this, If i buy a less newbie linux i should have this interface if i buy Lindows or Mandrake it should look like Windows.

      But KDE shouldnt worry about this.
  • I posted this [slashdot.org] yesterday on the discussion of What Features Would Make a "Better" GUI?

    Didn't get any discussion and was only rated a 4.
  • There are probably numerous ways to refine and reconfigure the basic card-stacking idea, but I think that is is a tremendous vindication of the idea that there is no such thing as too much information, only poorly-organized information.

    If it's made configurable enough for serious power users, this looks really smart and intuitive - not unlike how one would organize one's wallet, or Franklin planner, or Magic card deck...

    Just my $2e-2,
    - B

  • Looks like... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:49PM (#4770652) Homepage Journal
    The MacOS 9 control strip, plus the MacOS 9 pop-up tabbed windows, plus the Mac OSX 10.0 dockings. But hey, Apple's abandoned all of these good ideas in favor of the vanilla dock, so it's great that somebody's using them.
  • I'm looking at the screen shots, and with all those pop-out menu's, I'm left thinking CDE.
  • The graphics are nice, but what advantages does this have over a Windows style taskbar? On the one hand you have:

    - "cards" with their titled edges at the bottom of the screen where a click on the arrow makes them slide up to reveal their whole surface

    and on the other

    - Win95 windows where you have the windows titles on buttons at the bottom of the screen and a click on the button makes them come to the front to reveal their whole surface.

    If there are no major advantages you are simply adding another metaphor for the user to have to learn - unless you want to replace the window concept by these cards. Either way, you'll need more than a theme for KDE, you'll need to rewrite KWin!
  • I moved to Enlightenment because I wanted something simplistic, I'd definitely move back to KDE if they could implement this, it's the innovation they need, but I'm betting it would also have to come with a change in the thought patterns of the application developers. I'm glad someone has there thinking cap on.
  • I'm going to gag (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by aminorex ( 141494 )
    I'm so expletive sick of this radioactive candy
    dots design attack on my senses that I want to
    go postal. First OSeX, then WinXPuke. Fer the
    love of God, Montressor! Not KDE too!

    I'm not saying "back to twm". I just don't want
    the computer to get in my way. I want to be served,
    not have my senses spammed.

  • by imr ( 106517 ) on Thursday November 28, 2002 @07:55AM (#4774408)
    You can already do it in kde3.
    The only difference between his layout and a customized kde3 is the look of his task bar (rounded edges and pixmaps).
    Right now you can add more than one kicker, taskbar and kasbar on your desktop (right click on kicker -> add -> extension).
    You can also choose where to display them (bottom, up, right and left side) and how (center, left or right) and their size (to the pixel) and the size of the icons.
    My present layout is done in a way which respects most of his ideas since it came from my everyday needs.
    ( you could have many extension on top of each other for the double sized quick launch but it looks broken in kde3.1. Because they add this center, left and right thing?)
  • If someone could sort out moltiple monitor support, I'd be happy. Using my quadscreen rig in windows is a joke - I've got 1 monitor and 3 'bulletin boards' to drag windows over to. KDE is useable with multimonitors, but still doesn't do quite what I want without a lot of fiddling. It's still a pain to set program X to open at point Y on monitor Z, and inputting data when you have 7 windows open is still far from fun. Still, there's no way I would go back to a single monitor. Dirt cheap too - monitors = $60 each from computer fair, graphics cards under $10 makes a lot or feal estate for very little.
  • This is the kind of GUI replacement that could make Linux a real competitor against Windows and Mac in the interface department. It looks lightweight, innovative, smooth, and most importantly, intuitive. I think parts of this idea have been present in a lot of earlier *nix GUIs such as CDE, gnome, and to some degree with KDE's kicker, but those ideas that are outdated and not terribly elegant have been stripped out.

    Good job.

Algebraic symbols are used when you do not know what you are talking about. -- Philippe Schnoebelen

Working...