Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Solaris 9 Will Be Updated WIth Gnome 2.0

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the pitter-patter-of-little-feet dept.

GNOME 374

JAZ writes: "According to this article, 'The newest version of the GNOME open source desktop will not be ready in time to ship with Solaris 9 next year, but it will be included with a subsequent Solaris 9 quarterly update ...' Go Gnome!" I wonder if anyone truly prefers CDE.

cancel ×

374 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

CDE Roxors you dumb open sores lusers (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508386)

It's the best desktop ever. I have personally paid several hundereds of dollars for a working copy of CDE for Lunix. In the immortal words of Bender: bite my shiny metal ass.

*BSD-is-dying-posting is dying. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508487)

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD-is-dying-posting community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD-is-dying-posting accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all troll posting. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD-is-dying-posting has lost more trolling share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD-is-dying-posting is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD-is-dying-posting's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD-is-dying-posting faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD-is-dying-posting because *BSD-is-dying-posting is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD-is-dying-posting. As many of us are already aware, *BSD-is-dying-posting continues to lose trolling share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. *BSD-is-dying-posting is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
*BSD-is-dying-posting leader Benny "Stupid Trolling Retard" McGoatfucker states that there are 7000 *BSD-is-dying-posters. How many *BSD-is-dying-posters are there? Let's see. The number of *BSD-is-dying-posting versus Imagine-a-Beowulf-cluster posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 *BSD-is-dying-posting users. Goatse.cx-link posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of *BSD-is-dying-posting posts. Therefore there are about 700 posters of Goatse.cx links. A recent article put *BSD-is-dying-posting at about 80 percent of the idiotic trolling posts. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 *BSD-is-dying-posters. This is consistent with the number of *BSD-is-dying Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, *BSD-is-dying-posting went out of business and was taken over by Klerck who post other idiotic trolls. Now Klerck is also dead, his corpse turned over to another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD-is-dying-posting has steadily declined in trolling share.
*BSD-is-dying-posting is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD-is-dying-posting is to survive at all it will be among no life redneck retards. *BSD-is-dying-posting continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD-is-dying-posting is dead.

Re:CDE Roxors you dumb open sores lusers (0, Flamebait)

ou7L0ud (533591) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508501)

CDE is one of the worst GUI environments ever, it is so klunky and sucks so bad that it doesn't even deserve adult-like criticism!!! including even an incomplete version of gnome would be salvation!!!! blech: shiny metal asses taste awful *^_^*

Re:CDE Roxors you dumb open sores lusers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508524)

trolling for fees.

that will be $5 please.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508388)

fp
Michael Ducy sucks! :)

hot damn (0, Funny)

trollercoaster (250101) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508390)


That's all.

GNOME 2.0 (1, Insightful)

Lolaine (262966) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508400)

By the way... Gnome 2.0? What enhacements will they implement? I think its better to make it usable rather than making new versions. Un*x desktops have one handicap, Win-Mac are still far more usable than any combination existing on Un*x OSes.

Btw, Fp

Re:GNOME 2.0 (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508426)

Un*x huh? With the star representing any number of things.. like .. well all I can think of is the letter "i".

It's *nix..

Re:GNOME 2.0 (0, Offtopic)

Lolaine (262966) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508434)

It is whatever u want, since the trademark is Unix(oops i said it)

Re:GNOME 2.0 (1)

rebug (520669) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508473)

UNless you install gnome, it roX.

Re:GNOME 2.0 (3, Funny)

Drakantus (226374) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508492)

*nix? You mean like Linix? Oh wait, thats wrong. I guess you mean BSDix. Opps, not an OS either. Clearly you mean Qnix. Oh, thats QNX, my bad.

Re:GNOME 2.0 (2, Interesting)

snoozerdss (303165) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508503)

I think the reason for this is that Unix was never intended to be a desktop for the everyday home user. Sure people are trying to change linux int this and thats great but Solaris? I doubt it will ever make a dent in the desktop wars it just wasan't built for that. I use Sloaris at work and Linux at home but I couldn't picture my mother using Solaris, mandrake maybe...........

Re:GNOME 2.0 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508648)

GNOME 2.0 will increase the suckiness by ~80%. That's right, it will now suck 260% more than KDE on the same hardware. Get Yours Today!

Re:GNOME 2.0 (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508687)

I think its better to make it usable rather than making new versions


So let's say they do what you say (make enhancements to improve usability that is). Then how would they release the changes? Hmmm... make a new version, perhaps? You don't think they just keep releasing the same code with new version numbers, do you?

BTW, the reason why the next version is GNOME 2.0 instead of GNOME 1.6 is because it will be using GTK+ 2. This follows the same convention as KDE, which jumped from 1.1 to 2.0 because (among other reasons) it was based on Qt 2.

CDE!! (1)

terpia (28218) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508404)

Yes I DO prefer CDE. Maybe its just because Ive been using it for so long, but if given a choice between Gnome and CDE on a solaris machine - I choose CDE.

me, too (1, Insightful)

poemofatic (322501) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508444)

Although gnome is yummy snd cool, it's main drawbacks (to me) are

1) not stable enough. Maybe 2.0 will be different, but my win98 box crashes less frequently (although by "crashes" I should say "freezes up" I can always kill enough processess to get going again.)

2) no .init file. I miss my one stop init file.
3) slow slow slooow (maybe 2.0 better)

Re:CDE!! (2)

laserjet (170008) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508448)

That the important thing - for the next few versions of Solaris - Gnome may be the default, but you will have a CHOICE. A CHOICE to install CDE instead - and that's good. I personally do not prefer CDE, but if you like it, that's cool.

(for a while, until they stop supporting CDE :) )

My decision is made (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508406)

Well, I'm just learning *nix, and I was wondering what windowmanager would be more useful to know. It looks like now I have my answer.

Re:My decision is made (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508421)

kde is much better, though. bbl, michael ducy is giving me a blow job.

Re:My decision is made (-1)

Cheesy Fool (530943) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508428)

WindowMaker [windowmaker.org] ?

Re:My decision is made (4, Informative)

sawilson (317999) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508585)

It doesn't take that long to learn a new window manager. I suggest looking at as many as you can and then deciding. Get used to the idea that you have a lot of choices, and revel in it. Don't be afraid to try out new stuff. That fear is what keeps certain monopolies in business.

Re:My decision is made (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508592)

If you can't learn any windowmanager in a few minutes of screwing around, then either (1) that window manager isn't worth using, or (2) you aren't cut out for computers. ;)

good bye (0, Troll)

dukoids (194954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508415)

I'll switch to Linux and KDE before this can hit me... ;-)

Yes, I Prefer CDE... (4, Interesting)

Coventry (3779) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508416)

Why? Because its smaller and runs faster - nuff said, I'm a speed freak. I don't need bells and wistles on my Sun's desktop, I'll save em for machines that aren't expected to compile large programs on demand and as fast as possible.

fast? (3, Informative)

Yobgod Ababua (68687) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508500)

If you really prefer speed over bells, why don't you use something like fvwm?

As an administrator I found CDE to be overly complex, difficult to use and customize, and generally a pain in the ^@$@! Having Gnome availible on Solaris in a pre-packaged, official distribution is nice even if you don't use it as your desktop just for the included applications, which can be a pain to compile properly otherwise.

On my current desktop I'm using Gnome and sawfish and it's quite reasonable. On my Sun cluster (used solely for remote computation) I don't install CDE OR Gnome.

Re:Yes, I Prefer CDE... (0, Informative)

SkullRape (96773) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508502)

CDE Small??? What crack are you smoking? CDE is anything but small.

Re:Yes, I Prefer CDE... (1)

RGRistroph (86936) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508536)

The first time I ever customized any of the my environment files was because CDE was an ungodly slow hog.

I switched to fvwm. There was no fvwm2 at the time.

Re:Yes, I Prefer CDE... (1)

gorgon (12965) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508567)

Try running Windowmaker. Its smaller and prettier than CDE.

Re:Yes, I Prefer CDE... (2)

debrain (29228) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508669)

Try blackbox. You don't get smaller or faster than blackbox.

More WM? (1)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508417)

I'm not too savy on Solaris, but I do know that I like that CDE!

If you prefer CDE... (0, Redundant)

laserjet (170008) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508423)

If you prefer CDE, please raise your hand. There's bound to be one person. CDE would not be that bad IF it came with a whole bunch of apps like gnome. CDE looks kind of cool, but it is not that usable compared to more modern GUIs. This is a good choice, and it seems to be what others are doing as well (HP to go with gnome in the upcoming 11.2x release).

Good for gnome, good for the users.

and there will be a host of applications that use the gtk libraries that will be available...

Re:If you prefer CDE... (1)

laserjet (170008) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508472)

Before I get flamed - I am speaking in terms of modern workstations, not servers. you shouldn't be running x on your servers anyways.

Try XFCE (4, Interesting)

snoozerdss (303165) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508425)

I'm not big on Gnome or CDE but XFCE is a great WM I use it with Solaris and Linux it's similar to CDE but a bit more flexiable and quicker. IMO I don't see the big deal if Gnome ships with Solaris or not bacause you can always download it. But then again that may suck for people on a dial up connection.

Re:Try XFCE (3, Interesting)

Pii (1955) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508677)

I dare say, the vast majority of people running Solaris will not be using it behind a dial-up connection.

As for whether or not it's inclusion is a big deal, it absolutely is. Having Sun adopt your product is a very serious endorsement, and will lead to industry wide acceptance. (Another poster already mentioned that HP was looking to include it in the next HP-UX release.)

What is interesting to me is the fact that Solaris will not be including KDE by default, even though most would concede that it is a more mature, and more polished product. I have to conclude that this "snub" is related to the Trolltech Qt licencing...

Early in the KDE v Gnome debate, the Gnome folks stated that the Qt licencing issues would be KDE's undoing. While KDE continues to improve, it may never find it's way onto the installation CDs of the commercial *nixes.

Anyone read that differently?

With out CDE, it's just not Solaris (0, Redundant)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508430)

At least that's how I feel about it. :):)

(on the other hand, with out XFree86, it isn't flying on modern hardware either...at least what I've tried; is 9.0 really going to be any better?)

Solaris 9 betas (0, Offtopic)

b-side.org (533194) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508431)

You can get them from gnutella. The only big feature change I've seen so far is that 'df' now supports the '-h' switch.

b

Re:Solaris 9 betas (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508550)

How clever. You can also get them from Sun's site [sun.com] . Regardless, they don't support CD install at the moment, only net installs. I think I'll wait for the real thing.

GNOME is dead (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508433)

gnome is dead. why do you ask. because i say so because i know it. i am developing gnome myself and am getting pissed with every new day. GCONF = windows registry, no plugins system, 3 different configration systems, a tons of library which number increases every day. nautilus is slow and doesnt work properly, evolution permanently crashing and and and....

kde, well its thought well, nice plugin system, nice concepts nice ideas. i wish gnome folks would addapt a lot from their stuff. even konqueror operates 200 times faster than nautilus. but anyways i am disapointed with the widgetset QT, no matter if its dual licensed now.

we are now riding on a knifes edge with both environments. i doubt that GNOME 2.0 will kill all bad issues. i bet it will take for GNOME 3.0 or maybe 4.0 to compete with nowadays kde 2.2 at least from my opinion..

a last sentence.. GNOME is opensource but the developing community is CLOSED. if you come to them and ask about fixes or suggest any ideas. they usually dont listen or piss you off...

cheers...

Re:GNOME is dead (5, Insightful)

cduffy (652) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508513)

gnome is dead. why do you ask. because i say so because i know it. i am developing gnome myself and am getting pissed with every new day. GCONF = windows registry, no plugins system, 3 different configration systems, a tons of library which number increases every day. nautilus is slow and doesnt work properly, evolution permanently crashing and and and....

Not so! glib provides a plugin system; gconf is significantly better than the Windows registry; evolution 0.15 is extremely stable (I've been using it as my sole mailreader since the patch to a single disabling bug came out in version 4 of the Debian package). Yes, Nautilus sucks -- but there's no obligation to use it.

Also, as a C programmer, I much prefer the design philosophy behind GNOME to that of KDE. Yup, it's personal prejudice. Hell, maybe it's wrong. Nonetheless, I prefer it.

As for the development community, I've had excellent support from them. Perhaps you've exercised poor grammer or a conspictuous lack of research in your posts? (The lack of respect both of these show can rightfully, in my opinion, get one ignored in almost any community).

Finally, you may need to note: Wishing something dead doesn't make it so.

Re:GNOME is dead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508580)

agreed any application that supports .net is dead. Lets move on and build a new application system that will rule all others.

Re:GNOME is dead (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508617)

Call me a troll, but how do you back up your statement "gconf is significantly better than the Windows registry"? I'm just curious in what way you find it technologically or usably superior.

I'm not all for the registry, but please, if you're going to make such outrageous statements, give some points, please!

Re:GNOME is dead (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508694)

listen, GCONF is sad... reason:

it generates a lot of subdirectories for e.g. nautilus.. over 40 subdirectories containing around 50-80 %gconf.xml files. now if you instalkl 20-30 apps then its a waste of space. not to mention that you cant maintain that shit anymore. oki i know you can write your own 1 milion backends for gconf but it doesnt change the fact that its fucked up system. no real usability for the enduser.

the gnome community usually aruguments with 'the normal enduser wont want to know that' but hell i never have seen that ENDUSER everyone involved in LINUX and GNOME has brain about the system otherwise he never gets it running. GNOME has turned into a useless piece of junk a lot of companies programmed their OWN ideas into GNOME and some of them went bancrupcy and remaining is only useless code. e.g. nautilus. permanent little tweaks but NO real enchancements because the gnome developers cant handle it. RED HAT is overtaking that project since no one else gives a fuck. the usability team behind GNOME are brainless morons nothing special. i know each of them.. well i am no troll and i dont like KDE myself but hey they ROADMAP for KDE is better, their implementation in KDE is better. write one plugin and use it in all other apps. we have this in gnome NOW named BONOBO but hey we have 200 apps for gnome now and only 10 are using BONOBO i really doubt that with GNOME 2.0 everyone will ever move to GCONF or make their app PLUGINABLE.. things look different on KDE..

CDE is better, sometimes. (1)

pmz (462998) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508438)

I wonder if anyone truly prefers CDE.

I do. As long I still use the older 32-bit Sun workstations (SPARCstation 10, 20, etc.), I will use CDE (or at least something lighter than GNOME).

For example, I tried GNOME on an older SPARCstation model, and the CPU utilization meter alone utilized 50% of the CPU! Talk about irony.

Re:CDE is better, sometimes. (1)

laserjet (170008) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508538)

Yeah, I definately wouldn't put gnome (especially 2.0!) on an older sparc... bad news... i can hear the disk grinding in agony now.

CDE cleaner (1)

jimdesu (4951) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508440)

Solaris's CDE has great feel to it; gnome is great in concept, but without enforcing repaint discipline it's annoying to watch all the little objects bubble-up to the current state of the gui. CDE doesn't do that.

yes i choose cde (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508442)

because i dont like gnome or anything gnome

Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (5, Funny)

devphil (51341) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508466)

I wonder if anyone truly prefers CDE.

You're only wondering that because you haven't experienced the pain of OpenWindows[tm], winner of the [entirely fictitious and just-invented] Most Unintuitive Interface In The Entire Fscking World Award.

Drop-down menus are dropped down with which button? The first, you say? Oh no, that would be far too obvious and industry-standard. The third button drops down a menu. If you press the first button, it activates the first entry in the menu, without ever dropping the menu down. Sort of a speed-select. Confusing as flaming fuck to people who don't expect it: if the first entry is "New Window" then you merely have windows popping up. "I clicked on "File" and a new window popped up? Huh?"

If the first entry is more, shall we say, "proactive," then you just lost data. Or had a file overwritten when you were just experimenting. Or... who knows what just happened, since there may not be any visual feedback to whatever the fsck the first menu entry happens to be.

I and my users were both extremely happy when we were able to move from OpenWindblows to CDE. They will be happier still if I ever get the chance to build KDE 2.2 for my SPARCs.

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (1)

codingOgre (259310) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508598)

Umm, yeah, but have you ever had the luxury of ... wait heavens no...customizing the root window menus? What a piece of shit, then to make matters worse they hack-up some shitty Menu customizer that sucks. OLVM kicks the snot out of the CDE pager. And CDE is more bloated then Openwindows.

I could go on, but...

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (2)

devphil (51341) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508622)

Oh, certianly CDE sucks asteroids through a garden hse, but it sucks less than OpenWindows. There are far better windowing systems out there. I was just restricting my observations to the 2 choices that are currently shipping with Solaris.

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (1)

elmegil (12001) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508658)

No, you're wrong. OpenWindows with OLVM was wayyyy better than CDE.

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508642)

Hehehe, you call CDE bloated in a topic about GNOME.

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508614)

If this feature of OpenWindows really bothers you that much. Try selecting "Properties" from the DeskTop and choosing the Menus category. There is a toogle to turn off this behavior.

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (2, Informative)

MROD (101561) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508620)

Well, OpenWindows was basically a port of the old SunView system, which was the original windowing system, to X11R3. SunView was rather revolutionary at the time and, I think, predates X by a number of years. Hence, it doesn't "follow industry standards" because it pre-dates them.

The Openwindows (or OpenLook) libraries are pretty well call for call compatible with the SunView library calls and look nothing like the normal X library stuff.. and are arguably easier to use, hence they were used quite widely in scientific applications.

For those who are used to the interface, moving to the other windowing systems and desktop environments can be quite a culture shock.

On our systems we have Openwindows, CDE, KDE 1, KDE 2.2 and GNOME 1.4. There are a number of people who I can't get to move from Openwindows, others who PREFER CDE, a lot who prefer KDE 1 to KDE 2 etc.

Each to their own, I say.

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (3, Funny)

Balinares (316703) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508664)

Oh, OpenWindows. Just SO many good memories. :)

I got to discover OpenWindows' many qualities (sigh) when working in Denmark. My machine, a SPARC, was oooold as hell. So old that I actually saw a configure script tell me:
System type: SunOS version x.y
(Wow! I didn't even know those still existed!)

Humiliating. :)

This said, it's OpenWindows that got me hooked on the 'focus follows mouse pointer' scheme. Guess it wasn't entirely bad after all. :)

Re:Preferring CDE? Compared to what? (2)

ckd (72611) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508679)

OpenWindows[tm], winner of the [entirely fictitious and just-invented] Most Unintuitive Interface In The Entire Fscking World Award.

A comment I made during the Unix International/OSF wars, when it was Sun and AT&T vs. Everyone Else with Open Look and Motif their dueling GUIs:
"This just shows that it's not only about look and feel, but also smell."

The beauty is CDE apps will run on GNOME (3)

z4ce (67861) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508468)

I thought this statement from the article was rather strange:

"The other nice thing about GNOME is you can continue running your standard CDE motif applications, they just run on the GNOME desktop. Also, Java
applications can run on the desktop, so you really end up having the best of both worlds."

Under that logic couldn't you argue that since you can use gnome applications under CDE is the best of both worlds? If they still have motif applications you're not getting the best of both worlds, you're getting gnome with some nasty motif flavored bits :)

Ian

What about OpenWindows/CDE has its uses too (1)

Animixer (134376) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508478)

I hope they will continue to include the OpenWindows desktop as well, does anybody know if they are planning to drop OpenWindows in favor of Gnome, or will Openwindows, Gnome, and CDE all be available?

Even though I like OpenWindows, I almost always have my default sessions set to use CDE, since that way I can easily have my window manager the same on all the UNIX platforms I use (AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, OSF/1), with the exception of IRIX. :)

Solaris + Gnome? (4, Informative)

CrisTUFR (533587) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508481)

Not to bash Gnome, but I've had plenty of troubles getting a clean install of any linux disto w/ Gnome as the default work consistently among more than 2 reboots. Icons disappearing, bitmaps getting corrupted out of the blue, etc... It seems a bit odd that Sun is making Gnome the default desktop just out of the blue like this without first distributing it as simply an 'alternative'. Does anyone agree? Am I misinformed about Gnome becoming the new default. -C "All the world is like cereal. If you're not a fruit or a nut, you're a flake."

Re:Solaris + Gnome? (2)

jacobito (95519) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508609)

Maybe you're just unlucky? I haven't had any of the problems you've described, either with the Red Hat 7.0 & 7.1 default GNOME installs or with Ximian GNOME. I've actually gotten to the point where I prefer using GNOME over Windows. (And I prefer anything over CDE)

I do agree that GNOME is still very much a work in progress, and that there are still loose ends, but it is shaping up very nicely.

Re:Solaris + Gnome? (1)

Mistah Blue (519779) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508685)

Not to nit pick you, but you are comparing apples to oranges. Sure GNOME works great under Linux. However, the post you responded to was complaining about it under Solaris. It is a totally different animal with the GNOME addon Sun provides (i.e. it isn't ready for prime time).

CDE? You've got to be kidding! (1, Troll)

Philbert Desenex (219355) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508499)

People actually use CDE? What on earth for? It's buggy, slow, ugly, has no apps, poorly documented, closed source and bloated. In short, it has absolutely *no* good points.

I'm flabbergasted that anyone can prefer the steaming pile of crap that includes "dtterm" and that lame "tool bar" that takes up 12% of the screen and offers no noticeable benefits. I forget what that piece o' junk is called, the "control pane" or somesuch. It's the only thing worse than the Windows tool bar in terms of incomprehensibility and unusability.

It just goes to show you - you can sell about a thousand of anything.

I love CDE (5, Insightful)

Dimwit (36756) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508505)

And I'll tell you why...Three reasons:

1) I do 90% of my work from a terminal. The only reason I even run X is to have Netscape, XMMS, and SDtMail. I actually tried running just console for a while, and didn't notice any degredation in my productivity - it was just hard to read UserFriendly.

2) This is Solaris, and GNOME is very Linux-oriented. I don't care what anyone says, it is. I don't like not having access to some Sun-specific keys in the hotkey editor, or having all these "Unknowns" pop up in my sysid.

3) It's slower and less mature than CDE. GNOME is trying to hit a moving API, and there is the one problem with Open Source development: The second-system effect. CDE knows what it does, and does it well. GNOME tries to do everything - which I don't want. I like that it just manages my workspaces, windows, cut'n'paste buffers, etc...And doesn't browse the web, grab the weather report, make julienne fries...

Anyway, just my two cents. But CDE is a good desktop if you want a more UNIX-y (small tools doing one thing well, instead of Nautilis trying to be a web browser, file manager, PIM, etc.)

Re:I love CDE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508649)

I think that you are maybe trying to mislead us. Sure, there is some truth to what you say about earlier versions of GNOME. But your information is way out of date with respect to recent builds of GNOME. Personally, if you prefer CDE, that is cool. But don't make blanket statements about GNOME that are not true. The recent builds of GNOME are fast and rock solid. They will give CDE are good run for the money.

Why don't they port KDE as well? (1)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508512)

If they can port GNOME to Solaris and offer users a choice between the two desktops, why can't they port KDE as well, which, IMHO, is far superior to GNOME?

Re:Why don't they port KDE as well? (1)

Russ Steffen (263) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508616)

It's not a matter of porting - KDE already runs on Solaris and has for some time. This is about being included as a part of Solaris. KDE will likey never be included this way because "The Mighty Sun Hath Spoken And The Mighty Sun Hath Chosen GNOME."

well its clear where the problem is (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508526)

open sores coders are just lazy

g

Did they consider KDE? (4, Interesting)

Sanity (1431) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508537)

Although the mention of KDE in an article about Gnome is just asking for a [-1 troll] rating (wouldn't it be terrible to allow any real debate on Slashdot?), you really have to ask whether Sun gave KDE fair consideration in making their decision. My bet is that their decision to use Gnome has more to do with the geographical location of its core developers than the code itself.

Probably licensing issues (2)

wiredog (43288) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508603)

Gnome if free both ways. KDE has to be licensed for commercial use. At a hefty price, too. If they want to sell thousands of workstations they will want to keep the marginal costs low.

Re:Probably licensing issues (2)

Erik Hensema (12898) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508672)

AFAIK Qt only has to be licenced for commercial development, something Sun can certainly afford. Still a major drawback, but one customers won't directly suffer from (though indirectly the cost of their software will rise).

The real reason why Sun's going for Gnome is C. The developers at Sun are more used to C than C++ and Gnome==C, KDE==C++.

Nope (2)

Sanity (1431) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508700)

QT does not have to be licenced for commercial development, provided that the result is Open Source. The GPL which Gnome is distributed under also prevents use of Gnome code in closed-source applications.

Re:Probably licensing issues (1)

elmegil (12001) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508683)

Which is a damn shame, because to many of us KDE is better, faster, and more likely to be familiar in look and feel for Solaris users.

Re:Did they consider KDE? (3, Informative)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508606)

it had more to do with who application developers would have to look to for the tool kit. GTK+ is controled by GNOME and is free and is LGPL so you can link the libs to a proprietar program.

QT is GPL if it is a non-comercial application, comercial apps pay big bucks for the QT licence.
so unless you are going to GPL your app, you will have to buy a licence from QT to link to the QT libs.

Wrong (2)

Sanity (1431) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508671)

You are about 2 years out of date. The QT licence prevents you from using the free version of QT in closed-source code, the same is true of Gnome's license.

Re:Did they consider KDE? (2, Informative)

psavo (162634) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508624)

(speaking of KDE) My bet is that their decision to use Gnome has more to do with the geographical location of its core developers than the code itself.

I read this some tim ago on KDE KT Cousin [zork.net] , basically they say that KDE isn't that portable, and port to Sun asch is going to take a while. GNOME is plain C and has ran on Sun for a long time, so there's not so much trouble to go through.
Consider also that KDE uses C++, and Sun's own compilers isn't maybe so good at C++ and g++ sucks on Sun too...
And.. If Sun used KDE on their arch, they'd had to pay Qt $$. That's pretty hard to explain to shareholders when there's equivalent totally FREE option available.
I'm not talking about government however ;P

Re:Did they consider KDE? (0)

Seli (51600) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508696)

>I read this some tim ago on KDE KT Cousin [zork.net], >basically they say that KDE isn't that portable, and port to >Sun asch is going to take a while. GNOME is plain C and has >ran on Sun for a long time, so there's not so much trouble >to go through.

ROTFL. KDE runs fine on Solaris, and did a long time ago (just like on *BSD and even on *nix systems I've never heard of). On the other hand, I've heard rumours, that at the time Sun decided to join Gnome, Gnome actually didn't work on Solaris.

> And.. If Sun used KDE on their arch, they'd had to pay Qt >$$. That's pretty hard to explain to shareholders when >there's equivalent totally FREE option available.
> I'm not talking about government however ;P

One doesn't have to pay TT for running KDE anywhere. You have to pay TT only for developing closed-source Qt apps (KDE apps as well).

Re:Did they consider KDE? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508626)

My bet is that their decision to use Gnome has more to do with the geographical location of its core developers than the code itself.

...and you base this on WHAT?

Oh, just a hunch, right?

Sure, it probably has nothing to do with the fact that Sun's developers are more familiar with C (GNOME) than they are with C++ (KDE) [linuxpower.org] .

From that link: This came down to a comparison of QT to GTK+. We favoured GTK+ mainly because it was C based. We have more experience with C, it is more portable, we wouldn't be exposing C++ interfaces that might cause problems with different compilers and we would still get a nice object framework to work with which is well suited to GUI development.

You said... you really have to ask whether Sun gave KDE fair consideration in making their decision

No you don't. All you have to do is a little bit of reading. Again, read above referenced article, which was posted some time ago.

If you keep making "bets" on shit you know absolutely nothing about, you're gonna lose.

Re:Did they consider KDE? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508702)

With GNOME, Sun avoids license entanglements. That is the main reason Sun doesn't use KDE.

Enlightenment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508540)

I heard Enlightenment was to ship as the gnome default manager for solaris 9. I talk to several developers from UK sun who said that the manager of choice for them was E. Btw CDE rocks

"I wonder if anyone truly prefers CDE." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508545)

If they value stability they do. While its great that Sun will eventually ship w/ Gnome, when you buy a sun box its all about stability. You don't want apps or desktops to crash like Gnome or KDE do even if its only once in a while at this point.

I can't speak for myself...... (5, Interesting)

sawilson (317999) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508546)

I work in a sun shop. I'm allowed to run FreeBSD on an old poweredge instead of using solaris on a blade or ultra5. Almost every person around (all sun) has grabbed the gnome addons cd and installed it. At first it's so they can get xmms installed easily. As soon as they see someone else running the gnome desktop and ask about it, they are hours away from running it themselves. I pretty much compile and run blackbox on everything including solaris when I'm forced to use it. :)

GNOME is pretty. (1)

sketerpot (454020) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508555)

The thing I like most about Gnome is the pretty icons and graphics. For general ease of use, I use KDE. If KDE would get some cooler icons, or just 'borrow' Gnome's....

CDE (1)

PollMastah (174649) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508560)

CDE... *shudder*

OpenWindows... *shudder*

GNOME... only used it once or twice, but I think anything is better than either of them. I can't stand the unconfigurability of CDE... I literally spent HOURS trying to figure out how to customize the menus in the control panel thingy (not sure what it's called... it's ugly and silly), and it STILL doesn't behave the way I want it to. *Sigh*. Now, if only I can figure out where an unb0rken C compiler is on this miserable system, perhaps I have a chance of compiling VTWM (which, in spite of its flaws, is still my favorite WM).

But on another note... isn't it interesting how bigshot Sun is adopting a free desktop? Just a thought...

Re:CDE (-1)

SkullRape (96773) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508591)

Solaris, by default, does not come with a C compiler.
CDE is quite configurable - buy a book.

Gnome Users... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508563)

Apparently, Mariah Carey [romwell.com] uses Gnome.

Check out the pic at the bottom...

CDE (1)

sfritzd (181571) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508593)

CDE is simple and beautiful. Sure, its not an entire feature plentiful graphical environment, but for what it does, it does well and in an elegant manner. Things like start menus are pathetic attempts at copying CDE's drawer-like menus. I don't use CDE an awful lot anymore, KDE has some things that prove very useful, but I still miss those niftly menus.

Timing is everything... (4, Insightful)

(H)elix1 (231155) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508596)

I'm struggling _now_ to get mozilla up and running on Solaris (sparc). I'm past adding gunzip and make, grabbing gcc now, and have the source to the gtk tool kit. Less painful then setting up Oracle on Linux, but still...

This is GREAT news for those of us (me) who are not use to "using the source" and working from scratch. If they are bundling Gnome, they will have the GTK toolkit installed too! Its hard enough for a Solaris newbie like me to get an app installed, much less this plumbing. I've really gotten spoiled by Linux distros -- a C compiler and all the other parts are usually just there.

Wish it was bundled in there now. That which does not kill us...

Worth Mentioning... (5, Informative)

Misch (158807) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508597)

It should be worth mentioning that this story is an "update" to a previous story here [slashdot.org] on /.

CDE (3, Informative)

ixo111 (531660) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508607)

It depends on what you're after and what you have the time for. CDE is simple and doesn't seem to get in the way. Having been forced to use either CDE or OpenWindows for several years, and having found OpenWindows to be a royal pain, CDE was what i stuck with. I use KDE now, because it most closely resembles CDE for me. I've tried some of the more feature-laden (or ridden) window managers - tho some of my acquaintences may grouse and complain that i don't give things a fair chance, i require two things from a window manager : that it doesn't make me use the mouse any more than necessary, and that it doesn't force me to eat up screen real-estate with whizbangs and visual funthings. I'm definitely a terminal power-user, and would operate in text-mode exclusively were it not that I require a web browser (feh). If you gave me a choice between Gnome and CDE, i'd take CDE, just because i'm not convinced spending X amount of time learning how to deal with another environment will buy me anything - it certainly won't improve my productivity, as I am definitely of the opinion that GUI's hamper productivity (unless you're doing something visual).

Erm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508611)

would this be the same Gnome 2 that has been delayed for well over a year now?


Nautilus is unusable. Very slow and with very little configurability. Gnome is going in a 100 different directions, and as a result, it has become a mess.


Gnome has been held back, rather than helped by reliance on gtk+. The constant delayed gtk 2 release have stalled a lot of core GNome development. I am pretty sure the Gnome devs feel pretty stupid now for flaming QT, which has allowed KDE to take a massive lead over Gnome.

Sun SCSI question (0, Offtopic)

cide1 (126814) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508612)

This is offtopic...

I recently picked up a sparc station 5, and have been messing around. I find that under linux and solaris, disk performance is horrible. I have tried 3 differant drives, 50 pin and sca, and after running hdparm -tT, I never get a transfer rate over 4 megs/sec? How can I speed this up?

CDE and Xinerama... (2)

BoarderPhreak (234086) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508615)

At least CDE supports the Xinerama extensions!


I've tried for ages to get Xinerama support using XFree86 under Solaris - no dice, until recently I got it all compiled. Of course, documentation is extremely scarce, and I'm pretty sure I don't need an XFConfig file for the Sun framebuffers, but there isn't one included, either. Haven't gotten it to work yet...


The problem with Sun's out-of-the-box implementation is that there are no header files or some such (can't remember exactly right now) and it works with CDE, but nothing else! That is, you can't compile sawfish or enlightenment, etc. against their libraries due to missing files. CDE which is pre-compiled by Sun, of course, works.


So unless Solaris 9 w/GNOME supports Xinerama, guess what I'm choosing to go with my two 21" monitors?

Re:CDE and Xinerama... (-1)

Guns n' Roses Troll (207208) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508699)

So unless Solaris 9 w/GNOME supports Xinerama, guess what I'm choosing to go with my two 21" monitors?

I'd use Microsoft [microsoft.com] Windows [microsoft.com] 2000 [microsoft.com] . That way I could actually get some work done instead of playing with ESR's CockSay software.

cde? gnome? either way it is still SLOWARIS (1)

rudog (98586) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508634)

Has anybody ACTUALLY tried gnome1.4 on sparc/solaris yet?

It's slower than tar in Iceland!!

I DID have 25 solaris users clamoring for Gnome on the dekstop, and after I gave them a workstation loaded with it they were singing the praises of CDE.

Comparatively CDE IS the lesser of two evils.

The Fools! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508640)

Don't they know that Gnome is dead!?! At least that's what some 13 year old slashdot troll said!

As a regular Solaris user (5, Interesting)

pq (42856) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508654)

As a regular Solaris user, I dread this switch.

FWIW, I actually use OpenWindows as my desktop (oh, the horror, the horror!) and along with olvwm, it does its job and stays out of the way. All my real work is done with xterms, gcc/cc, emacs (so go on, flame me) and custom astronomy software. If you ever had the misfortune to use AIPS [nrao.edu] , you'd be into B&D too.

With Linux (and gnome) on my laptop and on our newer production machines, I just don't know: it looks (and feels) clunky. What 5 year old drew those ugly icons? Even with the "tiny icons" on my laptop Gnome toolbar, the only icon I actually like is the simple red star of Mozilla. And my work is all at the command line, I don't use icons! But I still can't convince Gnome, even with repeated "Save settings," that I'd rather not have an icons for /dev/fd0 and /dev/hda cluttering my desktop. Non-intuitive, hard to learn (this from an OpenWindows user!!) and ugly: is there any reason for Sun to switch to Gnome besides saving development costs?

I, for one, am not impressed.

Re:As a regular Solaris user (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508680)

I have news for you. I use Linux and I don't use gnome. I use fvwm for the same reasons that you use olvwm. I use xterms. I don't use icons. I don't need a fancy window manager. I know what I'm doing. Lots of extra stuff that I don't use doesn't make my work any easier. Let's hear it for simplicity!

Video Cards.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508659)

Great! We can have a passable interface! Now if only the x86 version of Solaris would support more than 2 video cards.....

Who USES Solaris? (1, Flamebait)

John Whorfin (19968) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508662)

Ok, this really isn't a troll, I'm really curious here: who actually *uses* Solaris?

Solaris has IMHO been what you run other stuff on top of... Oracle for instance or some custom, mission critical app or something (or web servers if you have too much money). Solaris has always been a kind of painfull, stripped down OS when compared to modern Linux or *BSDs.

But you don't actually USE Solaris. Do you?

If so, why?

prefers CDE. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2508666)

I think CDE is a more "finished" product than gnome but ugly as hell.

But in the end of the day KDE is my choice.

Gnome blows (0, Troll)

dens (98172) | more than 12 years ago | (#2508691)

I tried using gnome, but it just drove me nuts. I much prefer KDE.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>