FreeBSD simple GUI - PC-BSD Forums

David30 · #1 07-02-2012, 10:15 PM

Hi

From my understanding, FreeBSD is a complete operating system, in contrast to Linux - in which the Linux kernel and everything else is picked up and thrown together by different people, creating a fragmented and chaotic world of "distributions".

So why don't the FreeBSD team and others involved, such as PC-BSD and so on, develop one GUI for desktop computers with a single task "bar" at the bottom of the screen, similar to LXDE but easier and less technical to customise? It does seem crazy to have many desktop environments to choose from and this causes the fragmentation similar to the different options that Linux suffers from, instead of using the same components as part of the entire operating system. I know the GUI (X Window system) is optional, but if the FreeBSD team could develop this GUI as part of FreeBSD (and make it optional), that would encourage people to use FreeBSD on the desktop; PC-BSD could really help here, since it's customised for the desktop user. The default desktop GUI on FreeBSD would be the one that newcomers use and they would be unlikely to change it unless they are an "advanced" user. This would make life so much simpler.

What about a GUI for tablet computers' touch-screens? Maybe this could be developed as well by the FreeBSD team? I don't think trying to mix a desktop GUI and touch-screen GUI would work well, but maybe it could? What do you readers think?

I see that someone has suggested porting Wayland on PC-BSD to improve graphics performance compared to X.

I'm a newcomer to PC-BSD and I'm more familiar with Ubuntu and Windows, so I have a lot of learning to do, which will be fun.

Hopefully I have got everything correct here? If not, I'm happy for people to correct me on any inaccuracies.

purgatori · #2 07-03-2012, 12:13 AM

Yeah, it's kinda strange. Unix has a default DE/WM in CDE (Common Desktop Environment), but BSD doesn't really have an equivalent. FreeBSD and NetBSD don't have a default WM/DE at all, while OpenBSD and PCBSD include FVWM and KDE4 as defaults, respectively.

I think it would be great if there was a concerted effort to port CDE over to BSD (the work has been started, but progress has been slow due to only having a small team of developers working on it), and to establish it as a default. But that's my preference; it wouldn't really help draw in more general computer users, who tend to be impressed by pretty/modern interfaces.

To that end, it's probably a good approach on PCBSD's part, at least, to adopt KDE4 as the default desktop. It looks great, runs well, and it still sets PCBSD apart from the majority of Linux distros -- few of which include a really good KDE setup (especially now that Canonical are dropping Kubuntu). None of the other BSDs would ever consider adopting KDE4 as a default, because it's huge, and not well-suited to old/unsupported hardware. So yeah... I think it's probably an unsolvable problem.

Cobalt · #3 07-03-2012, 05:00 AM

purgatori, have you seen OpenCDE? http://devio.us/~kpedersen/screenshots.php

fluca1978 · #4 07-03-2012, 06:48 AM

Originally Posted by David30

Hi

From my understanding, FreeBSD is a complete operating system, in contrast to Linux - in which the Linux kernel and everything else is picked up and thrown together by different people, creating a fragmented and chaotic world of "distributions".

Not correct.
Linux is mainly a kernel, and all the other basic stuff, the so called world, comes from other projects, mainly GNU. FreeBSD offers a kernel and a world so that you can start using the system knowing that basic tools have been built all together and developed with the same aim and capabilities and quality control. But before DEs, it comes for instance languages: why does not FreeBSD provides its own Perl or Python or whatever-scripting-language? Reimplementing the wheel sounds like an extra effort that will provide no real gain, so let the operating system do what it have to and the Desktop do what it have to and so on.

purgatori · #5 07-03-2012, 07:51 AM

Originally Posted by Cobalt

purgatori, have you seen OpenCDE? http://devio.us/~kpedersen/screenshots.php

Yep, that's the project I was referring to. The last version I used (which might even be the latest one available) was a long way from being ready for prime-time.

fluca1978 · #6 07-03-2012, 10:22 AM

It is worth noting that CDE is not a desktop, but a collection of applications, mainly a window manager. I used the closed version when working at university, on Solaris 8 and 9 (Ultra sparc 2) and it was not that bad, I mean the idea of the panel was quite good, but the performances were horrible. Besides, the integration amongs application is almost nonexistent, and that's why it is not a desktop. I haven't tried OpenCDE, maybe it is better and integrated now...

David30 · #7 07-03-2012, 12:16 PM

@fluca1978 Thanks for correcting me about the "world" of FreeBSD. I was nearly right, when I said that the FreeBSD team develop more than just a kernel, in contrast with Linux, which develops just the kernel and relies on others to develop all the different bits and pieces.

I know the desktop environment is optional and I believe that's a good thing. I'm probably correct in saying that you only ever want to be running the bits and pieces of an operating system that you actually need? With that being the case, it would be great if the FreeBSD team and others like PC-BSD could develop one desktop environment for PC's, optional of course, with the single "task bar" at the bottom of the screen, since this setup is what most computer users are already familiar with. The end-user does not like learning something new and familiarity is the key.

It would be great to see everyone using FreeBSD on the desktop (including tablet devices) and enjoying its benefits without needing to manually configure anything technical, although that can still be done by advanced users.

thnewguy · #8 07-04-2012, 12:39 AM

I think there are two big reasons there isn't one single FreeBSD desktop.

1. There are already plenty of popular desktop environments available (KDE, GNOME, LXDE, Xfce). Why make another one when these environments already exist. Nothing would really be gained by creating yet another desktop environment unless it did something really new/interesting/important that the others didn't do.

2. Who is going to build it? FreeBSD is short on developers as it is. They have enough trouble just trying to keep up with core development and porting, to get a new desktop off the ground would probably take a team with significant time and resources.

In short, there aren't enough people and there is no motivation to create yet another desktop environment just so FreeBSD (an admittedly server-focused project) can have its own desktop.

fluca1978 · #9 07-04-2012, 06:13 AM

There is also another reason for not developing a new desktop: if that is becoming the preferred FreeBSD desktop users are going to stay away from the system. One thing that is really cool about OpenSource is that the user has the capablity to choose and customize the system exactly as she wants. Take a look at what happened at Ubuntu with their desktop: gnome users simply quit. And besides the problems in developing a new desktop, is the fact, as already said, that there are tons of desktop efforts. For instance there is a kind of KDE-clone, razor-qt that is very portable. So this is just an example of how good and advanced desktop can be found, and considering how many time it will require to develop a new one (not to count how many developers), I don't see this happening in the near future. Let's the OS guys do what they are good at and the Desktop guys what they are good at.

Artchi · #10 07-04-2012, 07:38 AM

David30! I undestand your idea. And I was thinking same. But its not the philosophie of systems like FreeBSD. They just provide a technical base. And the user or distributer like PC-BSD may build a desktop-ready system. It would be better if PC-BSD would focus on one existing desktop. The avarage PC user don't want choose. Or better: choice is hard.

If PC-BSD would become e.g. a XFCE distribution I could emagine that XFCE team would favorite PC-BSD and recommend PC-BSD.

There must be a coorporation to push PC-BSD. Two underdogs should cooperate.

The other question is, if you want an integrated desktop (one consistent OS): why don't you use one? There a two systems:

HAIKU OS: I have tried it (Live-USB) and it works realy good for a beta.

AROS: Open Source remake of Amiga OS. It builds on Linux, but Linux is hidden to the user. There is also http://www.icarosdesktop.org/ that is a special AROS distribution.

The alternatives are in beta status. So maybe PC-BSD is a better choice.