It seems like only yesterday that I was asked to write an article about AfterStep for LJ's special issue on GUIs (graphical user interfaces), and now here it is. The main points I will focus on are the following:
History of window managers and in particular AfterStep
The future of AfterStep
Desktop philosophy of AfterStep 1.3.1
My conclusion is that the best GUI is the most productive one, but only if it remains user friendly. Users must be free to do anything easily using their window manager.
The first window manager was TWM from Evans and Sutherland, and it was the base upon which Robert Nation created FVWM. FVWM has been used to create most of the modern window managers: FVWM2, Enlightenment, amiWM and Bowman. FVWM2 was used as the basis for FVWM95, and Bowman evolved into AfterStep. In this “tree” hierarchy, some exceptions appear: WindowMaker, the NeXT emulation window manager; and KWM, the KDE project window manager. Both of these managers were written from scratch.
Is starting at the beginning better than modifying an already existing window manager? It may bring personal satisfaction, but it will also create duplication of effort. Since all of these programs (FVWM, Bowman, etc.) are freely redistributable, there's no need to write the same code twice. If a feature you want already exists in another window manager, just take the code and patch it into yours. This method will save you both time and effort. FVWM already had most of the features of the modern window managers. The concept has progressed only slightly, while the appearance has radically changed.
AfterStep, derived from both FVWM and Bowman, was first written by Dan Weeks, Frank Fejes and Alfredo Kojima to emulate the NeXT GUI. When they realized they couldn't put all the features they wanted into AfterStep, a new project was started—WindowMaker. WindowMaker is targeted at Gnustep (GNU approach to NeXT programming and interface) with very innovative concepts, e.g., dock, DnD and “sticky” menus.
Even if it limits you in some ways, the ability to build on a good base is very useful. You don't spend most of your time coding a good equivalent of FVWM with many bugs. AfterStep is now evolving toward new heights, including simpler and more powerful configuration. Rather than maintaining AfterStep and allowing other managers to pass it, we (the developers) want it to become the most innovative window manager. For example, we're planning to add a few new features. First, concepts that already exist in other window managers that we plan to incorporate into AfterStep:
A file manager in the root window (see Win95 and KDE) with an Irix-like desktop
WindowMaker Dock and “sticky” menus
Enlightenment-like window decorations with pixmaps
FVWM95 task bar
OS/2-like voice recognition (see the ear voice recognition project on Sunsite)
The code for these features from other window managers can be copied under the GPL (GNU Public License). I strongly believe in and encourage maximum source code re-usage. I like the FVWM95 task bar, Enlightenment decorations and WindowMaker dock DnD; they're very useful and easy to use. Mixing and matching concepts from several window managers will ultimately result in a “best-of-all-worlds” situation. That goal is why some people install and configure everything they find. Merging these features into a single program is a much more efficient solution. Therefore, the idea is to make AfterStep more friendly by including many features into a homogeneous work. I hope we'll be able to meet most individual tastes. And there's no need for coding in a new way (C++, Gnustep, Qt, etc.) to meet such goals since most of these cool features exist in FVWM parented window managers.
I'd also like to see some new features that are not yet implemented in any window manager, with maybe a new way of coding. That's why AfterStep will first integrate the FVWM family features and then take a different path. New concepts that we wish to add are as follows:
NeXT desktop, in collaboration with the WindowMaker team
Module compatibility with FVWM2 and other window managers
Object-oriented management of AfterStep elements (title bar)
Animated icon and opaque window rotation
Total mouse configurability
Icons/help files/programs database (For example, a painting program without a nice default icon would “auto-magically” use a database icon containing a button for calling xman with the program's help file.)
Source code optimization to keep AfterStep from becoming slow
The sky is the limit. If you implement a good option in AfterStep, just send me your patch and if it's freely redistributable it'll be in the next version. If you think AfterStep is going to become 100MB, don't worry—all of these are compile time options. A patch is put in the executable program only if you request it (that's what we call meeting personal tastes). We're making AfterStep for ourselves, but one thing we also want is features we haven't already imagined. All this may seem quite ambitious, and we agree, we are. AfterStep's “pilgrim fathers” already did a lot, making such a good program, so it's not easy to make it even better.
Practical Task Scheduling Deployment
July 20, 2016 12:00 pm CDT
One of the best things about the UNIX environment (aside from being stable and efficient) is the vast array of software tools available to help you do your job. Traditionally, a UNIX tool does only one thing, but does that one thing very well. For example, grep is very easy to use and can search vast amounts of data quickly. The find tool can find a particular file or files based on all kinds of criteria. It's pretty easy to string these tools together to build even more powerful tools, such as a tool that finds all of the .log files in the /home directory and searches each one for a particular entry. This erector-set mentality allows UNIX system administrators to seem to always have the right tool for the job.
Cron traditionally has been considered another such a tool for job scheduling, but is it enough? This webinar considers that very question. The first part builds on a previous Geek Guide, Beyond Cron, and briefly describes how to know when it might be time to consider upgrading your job scheduling infrastructure. The second part presents an actual planning and implementation framework.
Join Linux Journal's Mike Diehl and Pat Cameron of Help Systems.
Free to Linux Journal readers.Register Now!
- SUSE LLC's SUSE Manager
- My +1 Sword of Productivity
- Murat Yener and Onur Dundar's Expert Android Studio (Wrox)
- Managing Linux Using Puppet
- Non-Linux FOSS: Caffeine!
- SuperTuxKart 0.9.2 Released
- Doing for User Space What We Did for Kernel Space
- Parsing an RSS News Feed with a Bash Script
- Google's SwiftShader Released
- Rogue Wave Software's Zend Server
With all the industry talk about the benefits of Linux on Power and all the performance advantages offered by its open architecture, you may be considering a move in that direction. If you are thinking about analytics, big data and cloud computing, you would be right to evaluate Power. The idea of using commodity x86 hardware and replacing it every three years is an outdated cost model. It doesn’t consider the total cost of ownership, and it doesn’t consider the advantage of real processing power, high-availability and multithreading like a demon.
This ebook takes a look at some of the practical applications of the Linux on Power platform and ways you might bring all the performance power of this open architecture to bear for your organization. There are no smoke and mirrors here—just hard, cold, empirical evidence provided by independent sources. I also consider some innovative ways Linux on Power will be used in the future.Get the Guide