On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 21:03:05 -1000
Joel Roth <joelz@???> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 02:32:45AM +0000, hellekin wrote:
> > On 02/27/2016 03:28 AM, Simon Wise wrote:
> > >
> > > something as minimal as possible, like above, seems a very good
> > > option.
> >
> > I dream of a core Devuan that is modular so that the Desktop
> > Environment is a *blend* that you layer on top of core. That way,
> > you can have a choice of DEs that users can prepare for their own
> > pleasure.
>
> For people like my dad who simply need to reach their
> applications, something like icewm is enough.

I'm exactly like your dad, except I demand quick hotkey access to
Dmenu, the greatest UI level productivity tool ever invented. You
should add it to your dad's IceWM: IceWM enables you to run arbitrary
commands with a hotkey.

> They don't
> have the interest or aptitude to master a complex desktop
> environment with twitchy GUIs in the style of Apple's recent
> offerings.

I hear you. I don't want my computer making helpful suggestions like a
snooty restaurant waiter. I want my computer to show me the choices,
shut up, and I'll pick one. And if I can't find it, I'll go to the
command line and figure it out. Or make it myself out of Python or bash.

>
> > The question of the default DE comes next: Devuan should be shipped
> > with a default DE. So far we've been focusing on XFCE, for reasons
> > unknown to me (normally I use a tiled WM without DE).
>
> I, too, have found grace (or at least sufficient
> convenience) in tiled WMs :)

I'd suggest a default tiled and a default floating low level wm. I've
met few people who are agnostic about tile vs float.

>
> I agree that if Xfce floats enough boats, and can be
> integrated okay, why not?

I'll tell you why Xfce is a loser in the long run...

I used Xfce for years. It's very nice. But it occasionally screws up
when you least expect it. It doesn't bestow a feeling of confidence, to
the extent that I wouldn't put it on laptops I was using for
presentations.

Xfce was a great substitute for Gnome2 after Gnome2 was kidnapped, but
the only Gnome2 feature it had that LXDE didn't was nested shortcut
drawers, and when I discovered Dmenu, my need for nested shortcut
drawers vanished.

Also, Xfce is fairly resource intensive. No problem on a modern
computer, but on that old 2GB RAM box you're keeping around, or on a
6GB computer with a couple VMs running, Xfce can slow things down.

Xfce is OK for the time being, but long term I think it might be a
problem.

>
> Alternatively, having a minimal window manager as default,
> possibly with a menu choice to upgrade to a fancier DE, seems
> like a way to convey that the various DEs are *user
> interfaces* rather than representing the OS itself.
>
> That goes with another radical idea: having people login at
> the console and type 'startx'.

That's what I do. It was the inability of booting to CLI that drove me
away from Ubuntu in 2013. But there again, some people like to boot CLI
and then startx, while other people will storm the Bastille if you take
away their direct boot to GUI.

One other thing. Unless one starts X with "startx && exit" or
something like that, people you don't want getting to the CLI can get
there with Ctrl+alt+F1:



> That way, when later there is
> some problem, you can ask the person to type some commands
> in the console, and they know at least to type something at
> a prompt and conclude with the Enter key. They can also
> understand that X is a layer on top of the base OS.

You can accomplish that by having them Ctrl+Alt+F2 and logging in.

>
> These concepts seems quite alien to many users. I think that
> even this minimal exposure to the command line could
> stimulate curiosity about what the terminal can be used to
> accomplish. At the minimum, people will know it is
> there.

Yes, but there are whole industries fighting to keep that from
happening.

>
> Maybe I am missing something about the motivations behind
> and the benefits of a graphical login screen, but it seems
> like the main value is allowing people to run their computer
> without ever seeing the command prompt. I think it would be
> of more value for people to encounter the command prompt,
> even if briefly.

I do too. When I got into computers in the 1980's, CLI was all we had.
Secretaries used it. Paralegals used it. Lawyers used it. Hobbiests used
it. Any person of average intelligence learned how to use it, and used
it quite effectively.

But then, to fill their pocketbooks, Gates and Jobs convinced the world
that only geniuses could use CLI, and all of a sudden you were a
neckbeard if you used CLI. Then Redhat jumped on the bandwagon.

[snip]

> It would be great cooperation to have one group to hack on
> the DE stuff, while leaving the Devuan core developers free
> to concentrate on lower-level concerns.

I can participate in that.

SteveT

Steve Litt
February 2016 featured book: The Key to Everyday Excellence
http://www.troubleshooters.com/key