Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GTK+ Continues To Become More X11-Agnostic

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GTK+ Continues To Become More X11-Agnostic

    Phoronix: GTK+ Continues To Become More X11-Agnostic

    As good news for those of you interested in GTK+ applications on Mac OS X and other operating systems, or to even run such applications within a Wayland Display Server on Linux rather than an X Server, this tool-kit used by GNOME continues to become more X11-agnostic and easier to port...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODY3OA

  • #2
    Does GTK have native file dialogs yet or is it still useless for cross-platform development? How about a global menu on Mac OS X? Or native icons?

    Version 2.20 is a mess.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
      Does GTK have native file dialogs yet or is it still useless for cross-platform development? How about a global menu on Mac OS X? Or native icons?

      Version 2.20 is a mess.
      file dialogs - nope
      still useless for cross platform development - nope
      global menu - yip, ige-mac-integration, http://gtk-osx.sourceforge.net/
      native icons - nope, never heard this feature request before

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
        Does GTK have native file dialogs yet or is it still useless for cross-platform development? How about a global menu on Mac OS X? Or native icons?

        Version 2.20 is a mess.
        It's not useless for cross-platform development, I use it all the time.

        File dialogs you get the standard GTK file dialog (you can design it with Glade, for example), not a Windows / OSX dialog, but it works fine. Remember, this is not Windows forms but GTK.

        I use applications on Windows all the time that do not have the standard file dialog, or the standard look and feel, and they are native Windows applications. So I do not see a problem there, honestly. The Windows-world is full of applications that don't use the standard UI, and we get by just fine.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by beniwtv View Post
          It's not useless for cross-platform development, I use it all the time.

          File dialogs you get the standard GTK file dialog (you can design it with Glade, for example), not a Windows / OSX dialog,
          Oxymoron.

          but it works fine.
          For some definition of 'fine'.

          Remember, this is not Windows forms but GTK.
          Non sequitur. WinForms are not a cross-platform UI toolkit.

          I use applications on Windows all the time that do not have the standard file dialog, or the standard look and feel, and they are native Windows applications. So I do not see a problem there, honestly. The Windows-world is full of applications that don't use the standard UI, and we get by just fine.
          What about KDE or Mac OS X?

          You might get by just fine with piss-poor porting jobs (say, Gimp), but more discerning users might not.

          native icons - nope, never heard this feature request before
          It's a real issue, though. GTK uses some Tango-based icon set and completely disregards what the underlying platform provides.

          Yes, it's possible to run some GTK application on other operating systems but the toolkit provides a completely alien/non-native experience. It's not a good choice if cross-platform support is one of your core design goals.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
            ...

            It's a real issue, though. GTK uses some Tango-based icon set and completely disregards what the underlying platform provides.

            Yes, it's possible to run some GTK application on other operating systems but the toolkit provides a completely alien/non-native experience. It's not a good choice if cross-platform support is one of your core design goals.
            On the other hand one could argue that it's good for cross platform consistency.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
              It's a real issue, though. GTK uses some Tango-based icon set and completely disregards what the underlying platform provides.

              Yes, it's possible to run some GTK application on other operating systems but the toolkit provides a completely alien/non-native experience. It's not a good choice if cross-platform support is one of your core design goals.
              You completely missed my point - In Windows, I have applications that also do not conform to the general UI guidelines, thus 'alienating' the user. In fact, every other application from a HW-vendor I install has completely different interface colors, controls and graphics (Audio control panel, WiFi app, and Samsung Kies are only a few that come to mind). Winamp, anyone?

              I fail to see how GTK is more 'alienating' than the rest.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by beniwtv View Post
                The Windows-world is full of applications that don't use the standard UI, and we get by just fine.
                I sure as hell don't 'get by just fine' but you are right that Gtk+ isn't even close to being the worst offender on Windows.

                Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                Oxymoron.
                You quoted a half-dozen phrases. Which one's the oxymoron?

                Non sequitur. WinForms are not a cross-platform UI toolkit.
                What's the premise? Where's the conclusion? He contrasts the two toolkits and you respond by emphasizing the contrast, how does that demonstrate the non sequitur? Ironically, your response is a non sequitur.

                It's a real issue, though. GTK uses some Tango-based icon set and completely disregards what the underlying platform provides.
                I'd file this more under OSX design wank, than I would a serious usability concern. Tango is generic and obvious enough, that it poses neither an egregious crime against style, nor an impediment to use (unless we're permitting prima donnas who choose their apps based primarily on aesthetics, in which case, I hope they enjoy iOS and Android's cavalcade of novel UI styles).

                I'd say there's also another good reason why file dialogues should be pluggable: the Gtk+ file picker/save dialogues don't even fit that well into Gnome, or Xfce. It'd be great if Gtk+ was flexible enough that nautilus and thunar could set their own dialogues - especially with the current HAL/GVFS conflicts with Xfce/Gtk+.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by beniwtv View Post
                  I fail to see how GTK is more 'alienating' than the rest.
                  Compare how nicely Qt integrates with Gnome and how crappy Gtk integrates with KDE. I'm talking about visual side of course.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    qt integrates shit to gnome... broken icons... size 50 times bigger than button...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by NomadDemon View Post
                      qt integrates shit to gnome... broken icons... size 50 times bigger than button...
                      edit time...

                      heres 3 examples

                      http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/9045/anu2.png

                      http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/3298/56935798.png

                      and dunno why, but text have strange color, always similar or almost same to inpuxbox background, cant see fonts... need to select text to see

                      http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/5...layonlinux.png

                      so... stop saying QT is good for gnome

                      QT isnt divine peace of software, same as GTk isnt, so stop this flame war!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Agreed that Qt4 emulates Gtk+ about as well as any other *nix toolkit emulates any other *nix toolkit. Qt4 has the dialogues but it fails the moment the Gtk+ environment uses more than one font, it misses settings relating to the display of icons in menus, the display of icons on buttons, the display/placement of scrollbar steppers, ignores a lot of the more complex window matching in the Gtk+ style. Plus Qt4 has a lot of widgets for which Gtk+ has no analogue, like dial widgets, the markers on scale widgets (although they're coming) and plasmids, which look really out of place in a Gtk+ environment.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by NomadDemon View Post
                          edit time...

                          heres 3 examples

                          http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/9045/anu2.png

                          http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/3298/56935798.png

                          and dunno why, but text have strange color, always similar or almost same to inpuxbox background, cant see fonts... need to select text to see

                          http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/5...layonlinux.png

                          so... stop saying QT is good for gnome

                          QT isnt divine peace of software, same as GTk isnt, so stop this flame war!
                          Really messed up, but take a look at this:

                          http://images.clementine-player.org/...tine-0.5-2.png

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                            Really messed up, but take a look at this:

                            http://images.clementine-player.org/...tine-0.5-2.png
                            hey I know how it should look, but it broke after some time, some updates etc, and it stops look ok, was also experimenting with theme and other stuff.
                            So.. icons was ok
                            but text in input box is same color as background anyway, need to change motive for that.

                            i use GTK i dont say its better or worse i just like it
                            QT is also good, but i HATE HATE HATE HATE when you use arguments, that QT is KEWL because it looks good on GTK and GTK on Qt doesn't.. its bullshit

                            both libraries are good, I prefer GTK

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by NomadDemon View Post
                              i use GTK i dont say its better or worse i just like it
                              QT is also good, but i HATE HATE HATE HATE when you use arguments, that QT is KEWL because it looks good on GTK and GTK on Qt doesn't.. its bullshit

                              both libraries are good, I prefer GTK
                              There you go. That's the right answer, folks.

                              The truth of the matter is that there's pluses and minuses with each of the popular (key word there...) toolkits and the argument that was getting used is a bit bogus. More to the point, arguments of "native look and feel" keep getting pushed around and while it's a nice sentiment, that "native look and feel" isn't so much so or is obtained by using the Vendor's own toolchain to DO it.

                              There have been attempts over the years to accomplish this task within the cross-platfotrm space and, so far, the closest to accomplish the stated task has been wX- and IT has it's issues. Most of the time, you end up sacrificing functionality to accomplish the task you're demanding of things. Even wX sacrifices some things to accomplish it's goals there.

                              Does this mean you should use wX? Perhaps- depends on what you're trying to accomplish. Some things will gain from the support for native UI widgets, some things will explicitly not. You should use the best tool for a specific task and not try to jam something less suited because it meets a tick box item for "native look and feel".

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X