* Peter Howkins:

> Are you interested in the idea of CDE becoming
> Open Source?

Honestly, no. Of course CDE was the standard desktop of commercial
UNIXes during the 90th but even at that time it was slow and (compared
to other desktops) limited and unflexible. The traditional UNIX desktop
is dead, with desktop apps going to either Windows or Linux, both which
have much better desktops than CDE.

So I really see no reason why anyone would want to use CDE any more...

Benjamin

· Benjamin Gawert :

> * Peter Howkins:
>
>> Are you interested in the idea of CDE becoming
>> Open Source?
>
> Honestly, no. Of course CDE was the standard desktop of commercial
> UNIXes during the 90th but even at that time it was slow and (compared
> to other desktops) limited and unflexible. The traditional UNIX desktop
> is dead, with desktop apps going to either Windows or Linux, both which
> have much better desktops than CDE.
>
> So I really see no reason why anyone would want to use CDE any more...

Yep. And if you have a look at Solaris, you'll find that Gnome (a
"Linux desktop", so to say) is standard now. If I'd sign a petition,
then it were one which would "make" KDE or Gnome the standard desktop
on HP-UX as well.

Anyway, what advantage does CDE provide over Gnome or KDE?

Alexander Skwar
--
****ing weak, dude!

Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> * Peter Howkins:
>> [...] but even at that time it was slow [...]
> Yep. And if you have a look at Solaris, you'll find that Gnome (a
> "Linux desktop", so to say) is standard now. If I'd sign a petition,
> then it were one which would "make" KDE or Gnome the standard desktop
> on HP-UX as well.
>
> Anyway, what advantage does CDE provide over Gnome or KDE?

The only reason that Gnome or KDE are not as slow as CDE, is that the
underlying hardware is faster.

I wouldn't want to run Gnome or KDE on my HP9000/400d. Or my VAXstation
3100m38. Or build it (actually i'm running HP-VUE on it, the predecessor
to CDE)

--
Alex.

* Alexander Skwar:

> Yep. And if you have a look at Solaris, you'll find that Gnome (a
> "Linux desktop", so to say) is standard now.

Right. Sun did a very nice job with their GNOME-based Java Desktop...

> If I'd sign a petition,
> then it were one which would "make" KDE or Gnome the standard desktop
> on HP-UX as well.

Well, porting a current ready2install KDE to HP-UX is one of the main
tasks of the vintagefreeware project . However,
this project is brand new and still needs some help...

> Anyway, what advantage does CDE provide over Gnome or KDE?

In the old days CDE was the standard desktop of almost all commercial
UNIXes except SGI IRIX (which with SGIs IndigoMagic desktop had a far
superior desktop than CDE). But while the world around made steps
forward the development of CDE was somewhat stagnating which was clear
because most UNIX workstations have been used to maybe one or two
certain tasks (i.e. CAD), so the average user didn't do much with the
desktop itself. Compared with even old KDE or GNOME versions (or any
other desktop system) it lacks a lot in terms of functionality and
ergonomy, it's simply a relict of the old days...

Benjamin

* Alex van Denzel:

> The only reason that Gnome or KDE are not as slow as CDE, is that the
> underlying hardware is faster.

You obviously never tried CDE on Solaris on a fast x86 machine. CDE is
slow, even on modern hardware. The interesting thing is that CDE on a
fast machine is almost exactly as slow like it is on a much slower system...

> I wouldn't want to run Gnome or KDE on my HP9000/400d.

You don't want to run CDE on that dinosaur, either...

> Or my VAXstation
> 3100m38. Or build it (actually i'm running HP-VUE on it, the predecessor
> to CDE)

HP VUE is only one of the predecessors of CDE, unlike CDE VUE is HP
specific. Other UNIX vendors also had their own desktops...

Benjamin

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 08:34:19 +0200
Alexander Skwar wrote:

> Anyway, what advantage does CDE provide over Gnome or KDE?

It dates from the early 1990ies, so it's less resource-hungry than
Gnome/KDE. Most of the speed difference actually comes from the lack of
anti-aliasing, something I at least wouldn't want to give up because it
makes larger LCD displays far more readable (IMHO, obviously - I know a
couple of people who insist on seeing each pixel).

I used to run Sun's Gnome 2.00 for a while on an Ultra 60, and it was
to all intents and purposes as fast as CDE.

The real disadvantage of CDE is that the underlying GUI library is
Motif, and none of the more modern desktop applications support Motif
(it's either Qt or gtk+), so you'll have to install bits and pieces of
KDE and Gnome anyway.

If you like the CDE look, I suggest looking into Olivier Fourdan's
Xfce, which basically is what CDE should have been.

Take care,

--
Stefaan A Eeckels
--
Governments are like babies: digestive tracts with a big appetite at
one end and no sense of responsibility at the other. The better run
ones from time to time get clean diapers...

Too late.

"Peter Howkins" wrote in message news:1159818568.106224.18040@m7g2000cwm.googlegrou ps.com...
> Are you interested in the idea of CDE becoming
> Open Source?
>
> If so consider signing the petition on this site,
> which I'll send on to The Open Group.
>
> http://www.petitiononline.com/opencde/petition.html
>
> With additional background information here.
>
> http://www.marutan.net/cde/
>
> If you've any questions feel free to ask
> or email me for more information.
>
> Peter Howkins
>