PDA

View Full Version : [ubuntu] What's the need for different theme engines?



sicofante
July 14th, 2008, 02:52 AM
I'm just wondering why all those different theme-engines. Is there any place with a clear explanation of what does each and how are they different from one another?

I'm trying to understand why should I use Emerald themes, for instance, instead of staying with good old Metacity themes.

Thanks in advance for any explanations.

beesthorpe
July 14th, 2008, 04:01 AM
Emerald isn't a theme engine as such - it's a "window decorator" to draw the borders for windows being managed by the Beryl window manager. As of last year the Beryl project has been re-merged into compiz. There's a short Wikipedia article about Emerald which probably explains it better than I could -//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_(window_decorator) (http:////en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_(window_decorator))

mikewhatever
July 14th, 2008, 04:23 AM
Most people welcome some variety, that's not a big discovery. Those preferring compiz over metacity tend to think the former is more modern, much prettier and cooler, etc. Yet, none of them, and neither do you, should use it. The choice is entirely yours.

sicofante
July 14th, 2008, 05:41 PM
Emerald isn't a theme engine as such - it's a "window decorator" to draw the borders for windows being managed by the Beryl window manager. As of last year the Beryl project has been re-merged into compiz. There's a short Wikipedia article about Emerald which probably explains it better than I could -//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_(window_decorator) (http:////en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_%28window_decorator%29)
Thanks for the tip. I still wonder what the other "real" engines provide (Murrine comes to mind, but I know there are others). I know the "Linux is about choice" mantra, but it's hard to choose when there's not a clear comparison between options anywhere. I also know I might get the classical "try them yourself" reply, but I'm afraid I've already done that and still can't grasp it.


Most people welcome some variety, that's not a big discovery. Those preferring compiz over metacity tend to think the former is more modern, much prettier and cooler, etc. Yet, none of them, and neither do you, should use it. The choice is entirely yours.
Would you mind to elaborate this a bit? My only serious complaints about Compiz so far is how it handles video from some sources (I'm thinking of Zattoo now) and the horribly designed Advanced Configuration utility (a useless mess for non-techies). Other than that, I value the usability improvements it brings along, like its Exposé-like features and a few others (I couldn't care less about spinning cubes of course; I'm an old man... ;-)).

AnLGP
July 14th, 2008, 05:57 PM
Yet, none of them, and neither do you, should use it. The choice is entirely yours.

I don't know why the Original Poster (OP) said this but in my opinion it's simply not necessary to have a functioning computer. It's all eye-candy and extra for the most part and it can take up a lot of resources at times.

sicofante
July 14th, 2008, 06:53 PM
Just an opinion then? I mean, no serious issues with Compiz, right? (I do care about the usability improvements that Compiz brings, as I already said, and some of my customers definitely do care about that AND eye candy too.)