BeOS
GTK1 Themes
Score 33%
Description:

This theme is modeled after the BeOS, a Mac variant popular among the digital artist/muscian crowd. It is similar to the BeOS, but not completely accurate, as some "ooh" and "ahhh" features of GTK+ are utilized (such as mouseover highlighting and indicators for pulldowns)

mikejames183

8 years ago

can u make a gtk 2 version of this theme?

Report

superjamie

8 years ago

I love that the screenshot is from 1993.

Report

etteyafed

9 years ago

I think that this is a great looking theme. Having used Be I know how it should look and feel. As far as GTK+ goes this is pretty close. I don't think that GTK+ apps can be easily adapted to a true Be style and still work the way we want them to.
I have not seen ANY other Be themes for GTK that are even close to a real Be appearance.

Report

Yaba

13 years ago

As Leinir has written in the thread above, there is a different concept: The "Expand" Button as seen on the print dialog.

Yes!!! Exactly this "Expand" Button is what I like way more than an advanced dialog. E.g. it's a pain to find settings like the shadow of the icon text on the desktop, or the option to fade out the applet handles. Why? Because they are on such additional Advanced dialogs.

Soon we will have something like Windows, where you have to click 10 times to see the TCP-IP settings. I hate these click orgies in Windows and I always thought KDE is about the best from all DEs and not about the copying Windows (including their flaws).

This is also what I meant by a global "Advanced" mode. When you are not in the advanced mode, dialogs have an "Expand" button that shows all the options. When you are in the advanced mode, the "Expand" button is gone and all dialogs are always shown expanded.

Report

Aurelius

13 years ago

Gentlemen, I believe what we have are two poles apart when it comes to desktop environments.

One pole is GNOME, coldly efficient and devoid of most configuration options in favour of "sane" defaults. While their defaults are not bad - and GNOME 2.6 will be much better in that department, and yes, the file chooser will be fixed - tweaking those defaults IS a pain, or is almost impossible. Sometimes it is not a big problem, since the default is okay, other times... well, let us just say that I find GNOME approach - despite the fact that I happen to like the DE itself - somewhat arrogant. It seems as if the users were way too dumb to decide how things should look, piece by piece. It is frustrating after longer use.

The other is KDE. With configuring options galore AND a staggering amount of tabs and switches. Yes, I understand SOME love to tinker with each and every piece of their system, the amount, especially when thrown into a newbie (seen that happen) is downright frightening. Not to mention the fact that some options NEVER get touched, unless someone is into nitpicking. I am not, and far too many people - at least those I know - are neither.

My point is: first, not all "popular" features are usable. Not all options should be available at-a-glance. Some things can be left in the back room for further tinkering. KDE needs sane defaults first (the looks department is a pain with Keramik IMHO, Plastik looks way better), restructurization of menus and config windows later. And "Basic/Advanced" switch at the bottom of every configuration window that would add more tabs to it and enable more configuration options.

I suppose both environments will slowly gravitate towards that. GNOME will get more options, KDE will trim some and restructurize others.

That's just my 0.02 $. Neither right, nor wrong, just mine. Flame away if you will.

Report

djworld

13 years ago

I can just agree. I think KDE should have less options, but without falling into the "unconfigurability" of Gnome. The "Advanced" button would give everything a tweaker needs and for the rest of the users the default settings should be the most optimous. We could do usability studies as the Apple and M$ guys do with their products to see what settings give the better usability and commodity for the final users.

Right now, I think the main priorities are to remove options from the toolbars and right-click menu-popups and see which options are the most used by the final users. Advanced users have the option of adding icons in the toolbars and there could also be an option to add/remove icons in the right-click menus so they have a few common options and advanced users can add more.

Also, I'm glad to hear the KDE Control Center is going to be redesigned for easier usability. This was needed too much!

Anyway, the KDE guys are doing a good work. Congratulations for that!

Report

leinir

13 years ago

After thinking about it some more (and reading your and the above message), it has hit me that we actually already have one dialog that employs a possible way of doing this. Have a look at the KDE Printer dialog. This dialog has a button which reads "Expand" on it, which is not an insult to anyone's intelligence, and also makes perfect sense (at least it has to everybody I've spoken to about it).

And yes, we really do need to let the KDE Usability Group do their work, and accept their findings. I am convinced that they are only interested in doing their job, and if you yourself believe you can do it better (all these "you"s are not aimed at anyone specific), you should sign up to the group and join in the discussions. I myself am just hoping they will find my ramblings (as they often are ;) ) interesting and hopefully also insightful :)

Report

dnuntius

13 years ago

I think books are a good resource when considering user interface issues. If program settings were treated more like entries in a phone book, I think people would find them easier to use.

For example, the phone book is divided into several sections for different purposes. The business pages and residence pages are listed alphabetically for quick reference when you know what you want.

The yellow pages provide a topical interface for when you know the type of thing you are looking for. Multifaceted businesses are often listed in several sections. Sometimes, a section in the yellow pages will refer you to other similar sections. When you are completely lost, there is even an index of topics.

At the front of the book, there is a short introduction with info about the phone company, maps of the town, and government listings.

In addition to the phone book, most people generate custom address books. These books collect info for commonly called people and businesses.

**

Translating this into a settings interface, several observations are possible:
- Trying to uniquely categorize each option is wrong; common settings could appear in several places.
- At a minimum, there should be categorical and indexed methods of accessing all settings.
- A brief introduction that outlines how settings affect the system might be useful.
- A user customizable "Personal settings" panel might be a good thing.

**

My personal feeling regarding "simple" and "advanced" interfaces is that they have good intentions but poor results. These categories just feel artificial and disconnected from the options.

When a new user wants to change something and doesn't find it in the "simple" dialog, what should he do?
- Give up, assuming its not available?
- Look through other parts of the "simple" dialog?
- Enable the "advanced" interface, learn how it works, and then march through it to see if their option is available?

This feels to me like a book that puts most of its material into appendices because the author thought they were cool.

Report

elektroschock

13 years ago

I prefer a "context driven" approach. I like the improvements done by Microsoft in the XP line. Despite the usability mess this was very good improvement.

Make sure that the context menu is not cluttered via plugins.

Report

pivarac

13 years ago

The idea not to use 'advanced' in favor of other similar word is good, I suggest 'additional' as the most neutral, it carries the meaning both of additional knowledge about the apps' settings and further, not so often used, possibilities for customising the apps' behaviour.

Report

leinir

13 years ago

If we are to use Advanced settings dialogs (which I voted for), we will also need a restructuring of most of the dialogs, to accomodate it in a proper way. Yabba's comment above about Advanced dialogs being a bit not-so-good is due to the fact that what is put in the Advanced dialogs so far isn't really thought through. The intentions are good, but this is really a job for the Q&A group: Find out what settings users will/do mostly use, and then move the least used settings to the Advanced dialog.

On that note, maybe it would be an idea to, in stead of calling it Advanced, call it Further settings... or somesuch, so as not to scare novice users away from potentially powerful settings, that are simply not used that often? (I am here thinking of a way to remove the clutter, without removing the power). Just a mind-burp there, comments?

Report

wvl

13 years ago

Hiding settings based on how adept a user is at using his computer doesn't work.

http://usability.kde.org/activity/recent/userlevels.php

Hiding settings in advanced dialogs isn't ideal either. Then again hiding settings at all can be considered a bad idea.

It's all about striking the right balance. Some settings can only be changed at a code level, others in text files and even others in "advanced" dialogs.

As long as KDE doesn't start moving to an extreme (like GNOME) and continues to listen to it's current userbase (unlike GNOME) then there's not much to discuss.

Report

Yaba

13 years ago

I am against these "Advanced..." sub dialogs. These subdialogs make it very hard to find a specific setting. Almost every time, when I have to search for a setting for a very long time, it's hidden somewhere on a annoying advanced dialog.

The better thing would be a global advanced/beginner mode. If you are in advanced mode, the advanced settings are shown directly on the dialog, if in beginner, these settings can be shown through an "Advanced >>" button, that extends the current dialog and does not open a new subdialog.

Report

surfg

13 years ago

yup on both counts

Report

Richardve

13 years ago

I wonder what the next 1500 news items will be about...

Report

Richardve

13 years ago

minus 2, of course :P

Report

sunaditya1

13 years ago

Well!
I think, Definetly no more protest related
news after reading your message! ;-D ;-)

Cheers

Report

WinterWolf

13 years ago

Yeah, this really shouldn't be here. instead, this si how I would have done it:

"Many websites down in protest"

Report

flamy

13 years ago

yes but we all like to see a load going down...anyway it's not as if theres a great deal else going on atm..

Report

kraylus

14 years ago

where'd you get it? i seem to recall suse 6.2 using that as the bg image when you just got done configuring xfree via yast. i really liked that bg image and i still do. i've been hard pressed in finding it though because i lost my 6-cd set and i really dont want to dl all 6 cds just to find it...

is there a site that i can dl it from?

Report

anonymous-hive

15 years ago

What is GTK stuff doing here? Isn't this KDE-look not GNOME-look? anyway it just seems a bit odd

Report

anonymous-hive

15 years ago

But I do agree with you that there is no need to pile up gtk-themes here.

Report

anonymous-hive

15 years ago

...to invite somebody to make a GTK+ theme that looks like KDE's default and highcolor-default styles! That way we'd have a more consistent UI. I don't much like importing GTK themes into KDE, because no GTK theme I've ever seen looks anywhere near as good KDE's defaults.

I might try to make a pixmap-based one next summer, but one really needs to do style-engine. Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer.

Report

simmons75

15 years ago

If one uses both KDE and GTK/GNOME apps, using a GTK pixmap theme is the only way to go, if you want a relatively simple way to theme both KDE and GTK/GNOME apps at the same time.

I for one wouldn't want to be bothered to create two different sets of themes for two toolkits just because the two groups can't be bothered to get along.

Report

anonymous-hive

15 years ago

This theme is a really (really) poor BeOS Interface Kit lookalike. The only proper way of doing a good BeOS theme is probably by writing a special gtk engine. Fitting pixmaps in default widget dimensions just doesn't cut it, you will simply end up with a crappy, amateurish look.



Report

File (click to download) Version Description Filetype Packagetype License Downloads Date Filesize OCS-Install DL
Details
version
updated Sep 13 2001
added Sep 13 2001
downloads today
0
page views today 0