HOME | DD
CharsiBevda — Evolution
Published: 2012-09-27 21:42:29 +0000 UTC; Views: 1412; Favourites: 20; Downloads: 36
Redirect to original
Description
Natural Progression.Related content
Comments: 46
Sure, here you go ----> [link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Really great desktop, I thought it was OS X until I read the section =O
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks man... glad you liked it
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I actually thought this was OS X for a while.. lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hehe, now I know for a fact that gtk pixmaps engine does not
support connected toolbar buttons... So I suppose you actually
painted those into the toolbar 
buttons to another place it would still paint the "buttons" in
the same place. Well I guess that's about as close to connected
toolbuttons you can come without writing some actual code.
QtCurve btw, actually has support for this (yes, even for gtk).
For gnome, this is one of the better maccish scrots I've seen.
The font looks maccish enough for me to be interested,
what is it? can I has it?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You're right about the back-forward buttons. Limitation of the pixmaps engine
I truly admire what you've done with Qtcurve, however I'm not much of a coder, I could probably never reach the level of finesse I see on your shots. I particularly love your file manager, It looks better than the actual Mac Finder dare I say
The Font is Neutraface2. I'll upload it for you when I get home later tonight
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, that's not actually any kind of limitation...
...more like a special case (toolbuttons are not
like this by design, in mac they are, not in linux,
so it's more like a special thing).
I don't use QtCurve, I write my own style (based
on bespin, most part is bespin still tho).
Hehe, well, thx, however, it's not the looks of
a file manager that determines how good it is
Thx,, gonna check that font out.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
True, that's what I was referring to. And Yep, It's not just the looks, but the tabs also look awesome on your version
If an app performs great and also looks great, what's the harm
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Tabs are painted by the style.
Who said it performs great?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I was talking about your file manager 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's in very early stages and my skills are
nowhere as good as the guys who wrote KIO,
also KIO has matured over 20 years or so so
I doubt we'll ever get a qt only filemanager
that performs as good as a kde one that uses
KIO (dolphin etc...). Also, I'm mostly writing
it with experimental purposes in mind.... If
I was serious about creating a file manager
for linux that would suffice for the normal
user then I'd do it with kdelibs.... it's
faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar ahead anything else
there is (for linux).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd imagine... I have exactly ZERO coding skills apart from the basic html/css, else I'd had been on BeSpin already lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Bespin is actually megacomplex, so I'd suggest
you started with smth like plastique or some other
standard QStyle.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I hear you... I'm waiting for Ubuntu 12.10 to hit final, and then I'll install it (Kubuntu) and give it a spin. I'll look into Plastique too, thanks
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
nononono, I meant if you wanted to learn
how to write your own qstyle, then that
would be a good place to start. Bespin is
faaar too complex.
Good luck with ubuntu... that's smth that
doesn't come within 10 feet of my computer tho
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Haha well it's the most user friendly one
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yep... I just pick that one because it's mostly set up decent (imo) out of the box.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well can't argue about opinions but
imo everything about ubuntu really sucks.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do understand why long time linux users dislike Ubuntu, just that it's an okayish distro for a casual user like me I think.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm not trying to change anything, we are just
sharing opinions
....a couple of months or so back in -07...
I didn't like it then and I don't like it now,
the only reason people seem to think ubuntu is
somekinda magical thing is cause of pr. It's
essentially just debian in a shite-brown suit.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know you aren't trying to change anything, we're sharing opinions indeed. I'm no Ubuntu faithful either, I just use what's the easiest/time saving for me. For example, I now use Pinguy Linux (which is also based on Ubuntu).. I use Pinguy just because it already comes pre-installed with stuff that I'd install manually anyway.. so that's a time saver for me
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You should keep what you have installed to
a minimun actually.... if you want to save time,
since the less you have installed the less time
updates take. For me however, I don't really care
how much time it takes to setup as long as I get
to say how it works. (prolly why I don't like ubuntu
one bit), for something that takes very little
time to setup yet is still sane I'd use arch no doubt.
arch has a nice system to build packages that
have not been pre-compiled and haven't hit the
main repos yet, easily isntalled with one command.
in ubuntu, if you can't find a package trough
the package manager, you can add some more repos
(resolve some circular dependencies), pull your
hair out, maybe get what you wanted.... or if not
you have to do it the hard way (manually, and by
manually I do not mean aptget install program).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What you say is 100% true, however like I said I took the easy way out. Maybe one day I'll sit down and have a carefully setup box with Arch.. at the moment though It's the easy way out for me
Arch is more current (cutting edge) too as you mentioned.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
setting up arch is not hard at all... at
least last time I set it up I was done in
like 15-20 minutes or so. .........ofc then
you have the base... then you can start installing
stuff you want like a desktop environment
and what not. However, with pacman, that
should be pretty fast.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmmm, that's news to me. I guess I should try and give it a shot myself and see how it goes. I'll most likely choose KDE as my DE because it's something I haven't tried in a long long time. BeSpin will follow, obviously
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Here's the wallpaper you requested, sorry for the huge delay, I forgot
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sure, will upload when I get home
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
