LiteStep and Linux themes as paired tools to help folks move to Linux?

Thanks.

Sounds like I was way off base.

Instead of developing one theme that would somehow work in both systems, 
would it be possible/probable and feasible to develop "paired" themes; 
one theme developed on LiteStep for Windows, but a second "theme" that 
would be a *functional equivalent* to the LiteStep theme, but running in 
Linux?

I'm thinking about how we might be able to do something about making it 
easier (or probably more accurately, less frightening) for a Windows XP 
user to actually make the switch to Linux.

It does seem like a good way to escort Windows users into Linux: If they 
saw a familiar environment when they booted up Linux, much of the fear 
would go away. Chances are they wouldn't have to make big changes in the 
brand of their software (many software businesses put out both Windows 
and OSX or Linux versions).

I'm envisioning some sort of transition theme, with a Windows theme and 
a Linux theme that paired, tied together by their look and feel. So much 
of the initial learning curve (and potential trauma associated with it) 
might be eased.

The idea is that a user who *wanted* to move to Linux but is concerned 
about drowning (i.e., not being able to get actual work/stuff done) 
could use the Windows half of the theme-pair for awhile--to get 
accustomed to approaching computing in a bit of a different way but with 
all the apps, mail and browser, etc. all still comfortably windows based.

When our nascent Linux user feels confident in using the LiteStep half 
of the theme-pair then it would be time for the big switch.

Ideally they would have already set up the Linux theme, preferably on a 
second machine, but perhaps in a dual boot. Point is, when they first 
fire up Linux, the graphical user interface would look very similar to 
what they had been using on the Windows side. Same output to printer, 
web, mail, etc., and same GUI input; the machines doing the actual 
computing are addressing the task in different ways.

This would certainly tie some of the Linux wings down for awhile, and it 
might also mean my work on the Windows side is a bit more tedious. It 
might be that the necessary compromises are made by the Linux side, the 
Windows side or perhaps most likely, by "splitting the difference."

Yet if soon after I boot up the Linux machine the same menus located in 
the same places doing pretty much the same things (OpenOffice, etc.) 
after a bit I might realize that I have been using Linux, thus I am a 
Linux user and it might be time to start some exploring to find out what 
Linux has to offer!

After I am relatively calm and confident about my new computer, I would 
delete the Linux side of the pair (not having used the Windows machine 
with its half of the pairing for awhile) and finish the transition from 
XP to Linux.

Is this a worthy/doable project? (hope it's not my third strike, unless 
it's bowling and not baseball)

Thank you for your responses, and for your patience.

Vagabundus

Roy Gathercoal



Antoine W. Campagna wrote:
> On 8/15/07, Roy Gathercoal <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Are these competitors (Linux shells similar to LiteStep) open source?
> 
> 
> In the Unix world, a shell generally means the shell of the command
> line interface. They sometime
> call the graphic server (X Window), window manager and desktop
> environment the Graphical Shell.
> I think most if not all Linux
> window managers and/or desktop environments are open source.
> 
> If so, would it be possible and useful (two very different questions) to
>> take one of these "similar to LiteStep already" shells and create some
>> sort of bridge that would do the on-the-fly translation between LiteStep
>> and the Linux machines?
> 
> 
> Possibly, LS is a clone of these
> competitors. Some still have text based config files that are almost
> identical to what you can find in a
> step.rc file.
> You would need some sort of stripped
> FVWM that would communicate information with a modified LS core under
> WINE. The different
> tasks could all be offloaded to LS or be shared between the two apps.
> Althoug, it would need a significant amount of work.
> 
> Here are a couple of potential benefits:
>> (1) An increasing number of users seem to be packing U3 portable
>> desktops around with them. Thus they can boot from the U3 and start with
>> their own familiar/preferred desktop, configurations, utilities, etc.
>>
>> Might it be useful to a Windows/LiteStep user to be able to move back
>> and forth with the (apparently) same desktop?
> 
> 
> I don't like U3, mainly due to the way it was programmed. It probably is
> possible to put LS on a U3 device.
> 
> (2) It seems unlikely there will be a shortage of users looking for an
>> alternative to Windows.  Sadly, Linux will not give Microsoft a run for
>> their money. Even taking together all of the non-Windows desktops it
>> seems unlikely that Microsoft strategists will lose much sleep over
>> market share loss.
> 
> 
> I don't agree with you. Yes windows will still be the main OS in the
> coming years but Linux will progress slowly, as it has done in the
> last few years.
> The alternative to Windows continue to be (in pretty much that order) : OSX,
> Linux, BSD and Solaris, which can all run Linux programs natively and WINE.
> 
> Especially in Asian markets, where some project that more computers will
>> be sold than in the US and Europe in just a few years! Note, for
>> example, that one recent theme skinning contest (with some really nifty
>> toys to the winners) was dominated by entries from China.
>>
>> This would not be my choice if I had something to do with it, but it
>> does seem to be the fact--in spite of any of my possible contributions
>> (!) Microsoft isn't going away soon. I do have to admit, though, that I
>> do not at all miss the days when every hardware and software purchase
>> required its own set of drivers and "play nice with others" utilities.
>>
>> So it seems reasonable that if we were to reestablish a solid base of
>> themes it would serve the LiteStep community exceeding well.
> 
> 
> I agree, more nice themes is always a good thing. Really impressive
> themes get a visible place on skinning websites by winning awards and
> stuff and many try LS just to use the cool theme they saw.
> 
> Also, I consider the LS themes to be generally of a better quality than what
> can be found on most unix skinning and many windows skinning.
> 
>>From what I am hearing, however, it seems that many of the most
>> experienced theme creators/LiteStep program developers have moved away
>> from Windows.
> 
> 
> I don't beleive most of them, maybe half or less. Many still need to use
> windows.
> 
> Putting all this together, doesn't it make sense that if LiteStep were
>> able to run platform-independent (or at least, Linux-friendly) we will
>> be more likely to continue to attract the contributions of our most
>> experienced developers? I would imagine that a good part of the
>> motivation to create themes (apart from the lucrative financial
>> incentives and wide ranging perks--cough, cough) comes from the themer's
>> desire to try something out/create something new on their own desktop.
> 
> 
> LS has not been designed to be platform independent and would need
> major work for the core to work natively in Linux.
> And even then, all the modules would need to be rewritten also using
> some OS abstration layer.
> 
> If we were to combine some measure of Linux compatibility with a
>> paradigm shift pairing great graphic design with phenomenal programming,
>> LiteStep would likely emerge as the "industry standard" and the measure
>> of every other package.
> 
> 
> You are pretty much describing Gnome, KDE or
> GnuStep which have already achieved this status and they can be used
> in Windows with cygwin.
> 
> 
> If we are going to create great desktop environments, don't we need this
>> community of experienced/highly skilled programmers?
>>
>> So is it possible? Is it probable? Is it likely to be worth it?
> 
> 
> Possible : Well everything is possible
> Probable : Not much
> Worth it : Considering the amount of work needed and the existing
> competition, I don't beleive modifying LS to be portable would be worth it.
> 
> What we can do is look at what is available in the shell scene on both sides
> of the OS world and use our observations to inspire
> us on the new things we do with LS.
> 
> We can also fix what needs to be fixed to have a complete support of Vista32
> and later Vista64. We can do the same thing with WINE and work around
> WINE's glitches or correct their code so that LS works flawlessy there also.
> Once we've done that, we can look at what else we can do.
> 
> Antoine
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Can't Unsubscribe? Check http://desktopian.org/listunsub.html
        LS List Homepage: http://wuzzle.org/list/litestep.php
            Get the LS FAQ: http://lsfaq.shellfront.org