i am guessing that’s Arch Linux? How is it? and why do you prefer it?
someone should use this image as wall paper
My work macbook, with second monitor:
The wallpapers are paintings, I believe. They are located here:
http://wallbase.net/wallpaper/109347
http://wallbase.net/wallpaper/146915
It’s hands-down the best-organized distro I’ve used. It lets you install what you want and doesn’t make you jump through hoops to get rid of stuff you don’t want (i.e. PulseAudio). There’s a bit more of a learning curve, but it’s worth it. Another plus is that it’s a “rolling release” distro, meaning that you’re always up-to-date with no major release upgrades like Ubuntu/Fedora.
how do you get anywork done with those desktops?
No kidding! Not only would I not get things done, I’d probably actively interfere with my co-workers’ productivity by making sound effects and barking orders.
GO HAWKS!
how do you get any work done with those desktops?
Its funny you say that, because I have actually did change it to something a little less distracting, like porno.
Kidding, kidding, I changed the right one because it was sort of distracting though.
I keep a stack of playbills in the basement, like PORN!!! - NPH in Glee
OK, I’ve eschewed desktop pix for frakever. Waste of precious CPU cycles and all that. But I’m so onboard the Scott Pilgrim thing (please don’t suck) that I’ve gone with this…
Ramona never looked so good.
Yes and no. The Ramona they cast works, although not quite what I pictured after reading the books (New one out the 20th!) Knives seems a bit old, though.
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/06/daily-5-five-retro-desktop-themes.html
if you are a linux user, here are some old school OS themes that can transform your desktop to NeXTSTEP, OS/2 or other retro lookign desktops… for those who just miss the good old days…
Sadly, those are GNOME themes. I’ve gone back to KDE now that KDE4 is actually usable.
Asian texts never looks right under KDE…
Yeah? Guess it’s a good thing I don’t need them, then. That must suck, though.
also for a while KDE’s slogan was that it looks and feels the closest to Windows… and i didn’t get why i would want my linux to look like Windows…
but now with Ubuntu, i am not sure why i would want my linux to look like mac OS either… so far with lucid, the background color change, the button shift and the single menu to come seems like cosmetic changes to be more like mac. at least there are things down the road that looks original and useful…
anyway, what are the reasons for you to choose KDE over gnome? for me it seems like there are more developers who listens for KDE apps… so KDE users seems a lot happier with their applications.
Hmm… I don’t ever recall that being KDE’s slogan. Anyway, I don’t really care if it looks like Windows, so long as I can do what I want with it.
Why the hang-up over it looking like Windows or Mac? I just don’t get this. I use Linux because I have control of my environment that I don’t have in Windows or Mac, not because of how it looks. Changing the visual theme of GNOME or KDE is really simple, so this seems like a bizarre complaint.
KDE has always appealed to me more, and for the most part I prefer KDE apps over their GNOME/GTK+ counterparts. The first releases of KDE4 were buggy and pretty much unusable though, so I started using GNOME. It’s not bad I guess, it’s just… stagnant. The KDE developers made a tough choice to make some radical changes, and a couple years later they seem to have paid off. Meanwhile, GNOME looks and acts pretty much the same way it did 10 years ago.
What I find so interesting is how often the argument of “it’s easy to change the default looks, why be hang up on how the OS looks and feels out of the box” is used.
Yet enormous amount of time is devoted by GNOME/KDE or Canonical to make these cosmetic changes. And even more time explaning why some cosmetic changes were made. If it really is so trivial, why not spend time else where? Perhaps say bring back GDM customization earlier?
Well, gnome 3.0 is coming this year. I do like what KDE did to improve speed and compatibility, although even after switching to KDE4, the gnome still takes up less physical memory on start up…
Perhaps you hear it so often because it’s true.
The window manager projects aren’t making the changes you’re referring to. That was purely a decision by Canonical.
Even so, this is a non sequitur. You’re talking about a company’s individual design philosophy, which has nothing to do with the simple fact that if you don’t like the visual theme, you can change it. It is trivial, and if you’re not sure how, it’s as simple as doing a Google or Ubuntu Forum search to find easy ways to do so.
Do you really want Canonical to spend their resources hacking together a theme-able GDM when GNOME will probably just change it again for GNOME 3.0?
Since we are in the show us your desktop section, I don’t think you need to worry about people not being able to change their themes.
To me the main difference between KDE and gnome are slim. Most apps runs fine on both. Even though KDE makes customization options easier to access, gnome is just as customizable with gconfig or ubuntu tweak. It really comes down to the difference in philosophy of where the Desktop stops and distro customization starts.
In the end, the real difference is in the performance in speed and stability. Right now, they are about equal also on that, with gnome performing slightly better, but few thousand KB in memory usage these days really doesn’t amount to much difference in performance.
Then there’s the benefit of having more apps for KDE. And that KDE apps devs are more responsive on average than their gnome counter part. Unfortunately, KDE is a bit lacking in Asian language IME support.
Out of the box experience is important. It is as important as the logo and branding of a company or product. Just because it is easy to change the theme, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea for a distro to look like Windows or OSX out of box. If switching sides of the window button has a purpose, since it is so trivial, they can just change it when that function comes out.
You mentioned the philosophy behind the designs, and that is what makes a difference. But what kind of philosophy is it to make the out of the box experience like rival operation system?
For gnome 3.0, the key visible feature change seems to be Gnome Shell… but I am a lot less excited about gnome shell than I am about Unity. As for KDE, I thought the reason they went ahead with the upgrade to KDE4 was because KDE3.5 was taking up more physical memory and in generally slightly slower.
why not? they had a full year between 9.04 and 10.04. Gnome 3.0 isn’t coming until 10.10.