Any suggestions for Gtk1 and gtk2 themes?
I'm thinking of murrine engine with MurrinaEroica theme for gtk2.
What about icons in gtk apps like rox, abiword?
All suggestions appreciated.

There for a moment, I thought you had inputted MurrinaEroTica! One of the issues with wearing contact lenses. Did snap my old, grey head up, though. Sounded like an ... er, ... interesting theme.

I have grown accustomed over the last few weeks to NOT having icons on my notebook computer's desktop. But I am ... well, see my sig line. If you want to reach Joe Average User than you need to have icons on the desktop, because a right-click to the menu is just too much trouble.

However, anti, your target audience of users is not ... well, we are not normal. Joe User is running a fairly up to date system that he purchased at WalMart and doesn't have a memory crunch. He/(she) could probably even run Fedora and not see a system speed degradation. Naw, he/she is using Windoze. Probably Vista Home and is hating life.

Your target audience is those of us who do 'puters for a hobby, perhaps (like me) have primary systems with which to catch up on email and (in my case) the Washington Post on a daily basis. Your target audience can break something, have to reload, and still not lose anything important.

In short, we are nerds.

We are one step above working in terminal.

So ... having said all that ... I'd suggest just updating what-ya-got to current and call it good. If you start chasing"I can add this feature w/ 64 more mb RAM" then you are missing your mission and target audience.

D.

I agree with dieselbenz (can't believe I said that.....ha! (a joke -- __{{emoticon}}__ -- sort of)) on the icon issue -- my vote would be no. As for themes, I like the default theme in AntiX_M7_RC1 as it is now just fine -- plenty themes are readily available for users should they (we) prefer something different. I personally do not see how you can improve upon what AntiX already offers. And, in the words of Forrest Gump, That's all I have to say about that.

As a general comment slightly off-topic, one of the great attractions to AntiX is your way of letting users have direct input into its development through the comments and suggestions you solicit. Thanks for that, Anti.

Moron:

Depending on where in North Carolina you live, you can leave as late as Friday morning and still be at my place in Iowa for the party at noon on Saturday. (It's an antique Benz thing but all are invited.)


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://don.homelinux.net/~don/IowaQ"
linktext was:"http://don.homelinux.net/~don/IowaQ"
====================================


Don
Elizabeth City resident x2
USCG, retired

Thanks dieselbenz but, looking on the map, your place is way too far to the"left" for me. Ha! Hope it goes well for you -- give us a report in Kafeneio Chats -- some pictures, maybe.
Enjoy!

PS
Nice Place

Not sure if I should post this elsewhere (not really on the subject of themes), but on the subject of adding new features to the next release:

I'm learning more about antiX/Mepis every day, and the discussions by more experienced users about adding new features help *lots* to show me what the capabilities of the OS are.

BUT: Sometimes I feel that I have to learn more about the surface features of frequently changing/developing releases than about the"guts" of either the particular distribution or of Linux itself. This is not an enormous problem, but I notice it with myself (and maybe others do too). I guess the essential point is this: when too much changes from release to release (even though it sounds bigger and better), my learning potential goes down pretty radically.

Additionally, when new and significantly different releases roll out frequently, I tend put new learning"on hold" since the next new release will change all the rules.

BTW: I'm not pinning this on Mepis (which gets criticized for not changing quickly enough!). Anyone who does regular distro-shopping probably knows what I'm talking about...

malanrich wrote:
I guess the essential point is this: when too much changes from release to release (even though it sounds bigger and better), my learning potential goes down pretty radically.

I am by no means the most experienced Linux person here, but my experience over the last five (has it really been that long?) years is that upgrades within the release should not be anything of concern at the user level -- they are security fixes or a few new features.

Even when there is a major change, based on the underlying kernel or distro, in release number, i.e., Mepis 3.4 to Mepis 6.5 ro Mepis 7.0-beta, what you see on the desktop doesn't really change. Hey, Linux is Linux, KDE is KDE, Gnome is Gnome, etc.

You are using essentially the same programs, just with some new features available and/or bug fixes.

Unless you are using something like my first love, Slackware, and most likely not even then, a release change should be almost transparent to you as a user. The possible exception is a change to X-Windows configuration, something that has thrown me for a loop more than once.

Exactly what issues are you seeing when there is an upgrade? The folks who are doing the changes WANT TO KNOW these problems so they can do a work-around.

D.

I can identify with that, malanrich: things do change awful fast. The beauty of Mepis and Open Source in general, I think, is that you can opt for the latest and greatest if you want to or just hunker down with a release you feel comfortable with and stay there. I know several people still using Mepis 3x and Mepis 6x will be around for a long time after 7.0"final" is released. I run 7 beta 5 a lot -- trying different things -- but my workhorse os is still 6.5. I've used all the AntiX beta releases but still work a lot with Spartacus. A good OS is like an old pair of shoes: the shine may be gone but they sure wear good. Find what you like, stay there until you're ready to move. __{{emoticon}}__

malanrich wrote: BUT: Sometimes I feel that I have to learn more about the surface features of frequently changing/developing releases than about the"guts" of either the particular distribution or of Linux itself.

This is going to sound"smart-ass'd" -- it is not intended as such.

If you want to really learn Linux, then find your way to the local Good Will or Salvation Army and buy a top-end 486 up to Pentium II system for not much of anything. Load an early version of Slackware on it (I recommend 9.0) and do NOT load XWindows or anything like KDE.

Now, download (from your XWindows system!) a good Linux-How-To and start experimenting. Lots of them out there, most about 1" thick.

Start playing in terminal mode, make the computer do what YOU want it to do, edit configuration files to your liking ... and in the end, you will becomde a Linux Wizard.

I've gotten lazy over the last half decade -- if I can't do something from the menu then I am reluctant to drop to terminal and do it manually. Used to be that I could install a networked printer w/out needing some program. These days, if the OS doesn't automatically detect the printer then I panic. ... Getting soft, I guess.

D.

Again, I don't want to over-stress my point. I'm really happy with Mepis, especially antiX. And probably I'm covering my laziness because I know dieselbenz is right about hunkering down with a Linux manual.

But still, my poor brain swirls whenever DistroWatch comes out with a new batch of releases. And here's another irony: finding a release you like and sticking with it seems to require *more* Linux savvy rather than less. When I hear about Mepis 3.x diehards, they're usually very smart people figuring workarounds for outdated repositories and library conflicts.

In the end, Mepis seems to find the balance between stability and genuinely useful innovation. I just want my vote counted on the side of those who don't mind consistency from release to release.

moron wrote:...
As a general comment slightly off-topic, one of the great attractions to AntiX is your way of letting users have direct input into its development through the comments and suggestions you solicit. Thanks for that, Anti.

I believe that the teacher learns just as much from his/her students as he/she teaches. We all benefit from this 2 way process.
There are people out there using antiX who know a lot more about linux than I do and there are people using antiX who know less about linux than I do, but know more about making it more appealing to people.

antiX is striving to be a distro for those with old hardware ie windoze 98 and later era (ie 128RAM and at least 200 PII processor) AND for those with modern computers that just want a very fast, stable and up to date, easy to install and maintain linux distro.

Spartacus, I believe, succeeded in this aim, but with limitations imposed by it being Ubuntu.

antiX-M7, being based on a mixture of debian testing, etch and Mepis's own repos, has less limitations to it, but more 'dangers'.
But the underlying philosophy of a lite, easy to install ... blah blah blah still remains.

The call for themes is just to make it look a bit 'prettier' (I know purely subjective) so when users first see the desktop they are likely to go"wow" rather than"yeuk".

So keep suggestions coming. I may not use them, but I will definitely consider them

Thanks for the feedback so far.

anticapitalista wrote:
The call for themes is just to make it look a bit 'prettier' (I know purely subjective) so when users first see the desktop they are likely to go"wow" rather than"yeuk".

I feel you accomplished this with the new wallpaper in 7-RC1. I will admit that earlier ones I had seen (what was it, just black or at least something"dark") did scream"yeuk" to me and, whether this was the reason or not I cannot say, I didn't spend too much time looking at it. Wasn't until RC1 that I took a closer look and ended up loving what I saw.

Wonko

What got me excited about AntiX to begin with was a lightweight window manager such as Fluxbox, Conky on the Desktop (very useful for determining whether the old machines have crunched their brains or are simply sloggin through a hard task,) and a minimalist look. There are a lot of machines still out there that run win98/95 that could be better used with a lightweight Linux distro. Transparency and a pretty desktop could help win those machines over for good. Whoever is willing to even try a new OS on a win98/95 machine these days is comfortable with not having a bunch of clickable junk on the desktop. Automounting volumes on the desktop would be nice, or at least their automounting in the file manager. I think the desktop image doesn't matter at all, make it a simple plain color like it has been in the past, and include a few images for people to change it to if they desire.

This image of a Zenwalk/fluxbox desktop really got me excited:




========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/7316/img44dcbb46a84d4em7.png"
linktext was:"http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/7316 ... 4d4em7.png"
====================================


AntiX could really appeal to the win98 power user with an old machine they're willing to try Linux on. Give 'em a secure browser, no need for virus vigilance, and seal the deal with transparency and hardware monitoring you can't get without proprietary software in windows, and you'll certainly get some dual-boots and installs!

I've personally got a Pentium 200MMX machine that has become a challenge for me to get an OS on that I like. DSL and Puppy work, but they're not what I like. AntiX is what I like! M7 not being compiled for older hardware is a problem, but I've got it installed on my P4 right now for fun. Whether it's 6.5 or 7, I don't much mind, but I'd love to get as much contemporary functionality out of the machine as I can. As it currently stands, win98 runs best on it. Yuck!

My vote, keep it clean. Besides you can pretty much add anything you want after the fact.

It kills me when i walk by a windows user and every app they ever installed has put an icon on the desktop. Have they ever seen a menu? I sit there and watch as they keep closing windows to find the Icon they want. HAHA

eriefisher

eriefisher wrote:My vote, keep it clean. Besides you can pretty much add anything you want after the fact.

Mine too, that's the original purpose, a distro for old boxes with low memory.

It kills me when i walk by a windows user and every app they ever installed has put an icon on the desktop. Have they ever seen a menu? I sit there and watch as they keep closing windows to find the Icon they want. HAHA

eriefisher

[rant]
Not only Windows users, but Linux newbies as well; they come with that"Windows refugee" mentality, everything is based on looks, when in reality the main object is speed. Thus, they engage in silly arguments about KDE vs Gnome, they fill their desktops/taskbars with icons, or slow their start time with fancy wallpapers or display managers that acomplish nothing and robs their box of RAM. So what if they got a gig of RAM?, their box would be much faster and liable to get in less trouble if they keep it simple. They disdain the use of the CLI and ask for an icon to acomplish something simple.

Everything is designed to make the actions of the computer slow but pretty, they use apps that are bloated as is their desktop, and when they get in trouble they can't use the CLI. They want their cake and eat it too: a fast, light distro with the latest apps with all kinds of wallpapers, themes, which if you think about it, is an oxymoron.

Of course, some kind souls give them the benefit of the doubt and think it could be technological immaturity.

Every mind is a different world __{{emoticon}}__ [/rant]