I also disagree. I personally want a next step in the desktop environment, but not a "next step" desktop wise WM is going in the direction I like. Maximizus, or what ever it is called, for example. Other FEATURES is what I am looking for. As a base for WM we could do it how ever we want. But if it looks old from the start, then others will not like it. I personally am thinking of the project's life and don't want the traction to slip. Best Regards, Jason Brower
On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 09:45 +0800, Paul Harris wrote: > > > On 5 April 2010 05:17, Renato Botelho <rbga...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Alexey I. Froloff > <ra...@altlinux.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 08:14:51PM +0200, Johann Haarhoff > wrote: > >> I tried to stay close to the Next look, but yet make things > a > >> bit more modern. Too much? > > BTW, True NeXT look description can be found at > > > http://www.cilinder.be/docs/next/NeXTStep/3.3/nd/UserInterface/ > > and I would *LOVE* to have this look at least as > compile-time > > option. > > > Seconded, keep NextStep look like is fundamental for people > that like windowmaker. :) > > > i disagree, the NextStep look is ok, i like the sizes of boxes and the > title bar sizes, but eg the scrollbars etc are clunky and outdated. i > don't mind it, but its not fundamental to whether i like wmaker or > not. > > > i like windowmaker not because of openstep/nextstep, but because it > behaves so nicely and doesn't get in my way. look is part of that, > but there is room for some bling. > -- To unsubscribe, send mail to wmaker-dev-unsubscr...@lists.windowmaker.info.
