Aurora Desktop Environment

[tread]

I tried to search and make sure this wasn't reported here, but what with a member called Aurora the search was tricky :) So I apologize if I am repeating anything here.
Aurora Desktop Environment (http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=25009&PHPSESSID=16d2bddfe767d17084f1a29e2fb5d761)

[N'Jal]

Yes i have been watching this develop for a while now, once it's stable i would like to see some debs so that i can redeploy ubuntu accross my dad's work's PC's with the XP look and see if anyone would notice, though seriously an XP looking desktop would be a good thing since people who want to try linux without getting too much of a fright could use it until they discover gnome :P

Yes i prefer GNOME but i see the potential for the aurora desktop

[az]

Can you give it another, less ugly look?

*giggle*

[sapo]

i m using linux to get rid of xp.. and you come with it.. it brings back bad memories ](*,)

btw.. for noobs is a good thing :roll:

[Dave88]

I could put the on the family computer(xp) and no one would notice, perfect crime!

[panickedthumb]

*shudder* why'd you have to go and do that now? I was all excited about a new DE until I saw what looked like Windows staring back at me.

*looks at monitor*
Well, I'm at work, on Windows, so I guess I can't complain to much.

[Quest-Master]

Doesn't http://www.xpde.com/ already do this?

[sapo]

*shudder* why'd you have to go and do that now? I was all excited about a new DE until I saw what looked like Windows staring back at me.

*looks at monitor*
Well, I'm at work, on Windows, so I guess I can't complain to much.

man.. i m lucky cause i can work in my Ubuntu box.. but windows makes me sometimes look stupid to my clientes.. let me tell you what happened last week ](*,)

i m making a php cms to a public company its related with some politicians...

Last week i had to show them the progress of my work...

But the main feature of this cms is a interative poll system, we they have several questions regarding to our town and we have to answer them one by one.. and you can save it and come back later to finish. cause its a lot of questions...

So... i choose the option.. clicked in save... and...

THE STUPID IE DIDNT FOLLOWED THE W3C STANDARDS...

so i had this in my code:
<option disabled="disabled">

BUT IN IE YOU CANT DISABLE A SINGLE OPTION ](*,)

you have to disable all the goddamn <select>

man.. i felt stupid in from of them.. "but, isnt it supposed to be disabled after they answer it?"

man... i could kill the s.o.b. that made this part of the IE...

give it a try guys... try making a select like this in IE:

<select id="sel1">
<option id="opt1">opt 1</select>
<option id="opt2" disabled="disabled">opt 2</select>
<option id="opt3">opt 3</select>
</select>

if you open it in firefox.. the opt 2 will be disabled... but if you open it in ie... everything will be enabled ](*,)

I browsed the w3c and this should work.. but who cares about the w3c...

[az]

Doesn't http://www.xpde.com/ already do this?
Great! Kylix! Another proprietary development environment!

[FLeiXiuS]

I've been using xpde since the beta stages. :-) I love it. Fantastic especially when my mom uses my laptop. She's so used to the startbar. Just correct the mime types for .exe's, give her java / flash support and shes happy. Yahoo games :-P

[poofyhairguy]

I tried to search and make sure this wasn't reported here, but what with a member called Aurora the search was tricky :) So I apologize if I am repeating anything here.
Aurora Desktop Environment (http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=25009&PHPSESSID=16d2bddfe767d17084f1a29e2fb5d761)


Looks....hmm....like you could really trick someone. Personally I would rather force KDE to look like Windows if I loved XP that much (or I would just use windows).

[m0biu5]

I've been using xpde since the beta stages. :-) I love it. Fantastic especially when my mom uses my laptop. She's so used to the startbar. Just correct the mime types for .exe's, give her java / flash support and shes happy. Yahoo games :-P
Yeah, I am wondering if I can get my parents to use ubuntu. The problem is they are just starting to learn some windows, so maybe this would make for a good transition.

[jimcooncat]

As I'm moving my coworkers over to Linux soon (hopefully Gnome, hopefully Ubuntu), my inclination is to make sure it doesn't look like Windows, so they'll know there are some differences in how it works.

Your feelings on this, please?

By the way, I just changed my Windows theme to brown. A temporary panacea.

[poofyhairguy]

Yeah, I am wondering if I can get my parents to use ubuntu. The problem is they are just starting to learn some windows, so maybe this would make for a good transition.


Get them before they learn Windows and they won't have two learning curves.

[minimidgy]

maybe they should change the name...

It reminds me of probably one of the most annoying pieces of spyware/adware for microsoft windows. The name kinda made me question about going to that site.

[DJ_Max]

Great! Kylix! Another proprietary development environment!
Whats wrong with proprietary software? If it well written, secure, and the company is reputable, why not use it?

[ZephyrXero]

Depends on your definition of "proprietary software". Standard EULA type proprietary software is retarded. You're not allowed to modify the code to it no matter what, even though you paid for it. Now, I do believe there is a grey area between open source and proprietary. If someone were to give their users all the same rights of an open source license, minus the right to redistribute it then I'd be fine with it. I also would limit it to higher level software. Any common software, like an operating system, desktop environment or browser...for example should always be free (as in both beer & freedom).

[bgstratt]

How can you tell if it is well written or secure if you can't see the source, mind you, I don't read every single source code myself, but nobody else can see the source either, there is no community that has gone through any part of it to bring a general consensus that it is secure or well written. It could be a proprietary piece of spyware, and I can't think of many companies that can be considered reputable, almost any company exists for one reason, to make money, although it may not be "by any means necessary" as some do, how could anybody tell if the source is closed, I don't think I know anybody who can read binary, well except for maybe that one guy. :---)


I may be confused about proprietary and binary only, but for some reason, they seem the same to me, eh, oh well.

[Kvark]

Whats the point of making linux look like windows....

If you switch from windows to linux then it is either because you want linux or because you want something else then windows. Not because you want to stare into what you just left.

Changing functionality to be similar may reduce learning curve but changing the looks to be similar is pointless.



The one positive thing I see in this is that Aurora (the user) might like Aurora (the desktop environment)

[MetalMusicAddict]

I wish people would bother to go to his Homepage (http://auroraproject.sourceforge.net/index.html). :)

"As you all can see in the screenshots (currently 99% functional) I'm for now using a Windows XP-cloned UI, which I myself don't like. I am interested in engineering a new one, and so I need your help."

[DJ_Max]

How can you tell if it is well written or secure if you can't see the source, mind you, I don't read every single source code myself, but nobody else can see the source either, there is no community that has gone through any part of it to bring a general consensus that it is secure or well written. It could be a proprietary piece of spyware, and I can't think of many companies that can be considered reputable, almost any company exists for one reason, to make money, although it may not be "by any means necessary" as some do, how could anybody tell if the source is closed, ..
Many people think of all businesses as evil, which is completely stupid, most people are trying to put food on the table, and OSS, in most cases, doesn't do that. It's really paranoidal to wonder if a piece of closed source software is dangerous. If you don't use software from some "shady" company, you have nothing to worry about. This is not directed at anyone, but this is what erks me about some Linux users, everything has to be open source and free as in beer. :-?

There are certain things that should not be proprietary, such as codecs(mp3, wmv, etc,.), plugins(Macromedia flash and shockwave). But there really is no control over it.
I may be confused about proprietary and binary only, but for some reason, they seem the same to me, eh, oh well.
They're completely different terms.
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/b/binary.html
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/p/proprietary.html

Just that proprietary software usually comes in binary forms.

[bgstratt]

Hehe, I do know that there is a difference in proprietary and binary, although they are used almost synonymously together, hence I do agree with you, most proprietary software is binary, and closed source. My argument though was that there is no way to tell if something is well written or safe if it is closed source.

I don't have anything in particular against proprietary or binary only closed-source programs, and generally am pretty trusting, to an extent, but only because nothing too bad has happened to me yet. There is always a chance that something could happen, or be used against you later, for instance the torrent creator advocating piracy long before he began work on the torrent, long before he grew up. Or with the advent of Longhorn and built in copyright and Digital rights management, you bypass it then your computer won't work, or they let you get away with it, little by little, then the feds are at your house years later with thousands upon thousands of dollars worth of illegal pirating or encryption bypassing of your own movies that you only copied for your own private use but is still illegal and you go to jail for 10 years or more for copying Disney's Snow White for your daughter to watch so the original didn't get damaged.

It could and does happen, maybe not today, but maybe next year after the dollars have added up enough. Look at the kids with Napster, thousands of people downloaded songs, yet only the ones with the most get prosecuted, consider going over 3-5 years, the life of an OS, how many songs and movies could be burned or copied for your own personal use, not including pirates mind you, but just those who do it mostly legally, (i.e. you do in fact own a copy) after that amount of time you would have amassed a debt far surpassing any that those people did, and say there was a small program, like an error reporting tool, that sent that data to someone without your knowledge because the code was closed and you didn't know it was doing that, you weren't informed, they could never pass that up, they've prosecuted for less money before, what would stop them from from trying, how would anybody know, the source is closed, who knows what all goes on.

But alas, I am drifting way off from the topic of the thread, the Aurora Desktop Environment, so I will shut my big dumb mouth about other things for a moment. What I don't understand about it, is how the Ubuntu symbol is bad to be copied, but yet the whole layout of a desktop environment is ok, I don't think either is right, taking one's ideas as your own is theft, however if you do come up, or invent it separately then that is different and to me is ok, hence the recent good news in the EU.