Joined: Oct. 2003
||Posted: July 17 2007,12:07
|Quote (^thehatsrule^ @ July 17 2007,00:18)|
|- right-click menu on the dfm desktop for XTerm starts the directory in /ramdisk/home/dsl/.dfmdesk -- not sure if this is the intended behaviour|
- the icons look like they are very low in quality (at least, compared to the previous icons used with xtdesk). Was this done on purpose due to the sheer amount of new icons, or is this a limitation of the implementation of dfm?
The xterm opening is based on where you are. On the desktop it opens in the desktop, as you have noted. Double like the home folder and then right click for xterm and you will have xterm opened there.
If you open the Apps folder and click the Aterm icon, it should behave as before. You should drag your choices of desktop icons from the Apps folder to the desktop.
I placed minimal icons on the desktop and would rather let the use select which applications they want. This is especially true for the drag and drop. If have placed all the traditional icons then you may not want to use beaver as your target drag and drop. I copy vi to the desktop and then drag shell scripts and lua on it to edit. Also, the remark has been made that many do not use many of the icons shown previously on the desktop. So I decided to have minimal default icons rather than possibly have an even more crowded desktop covered with icons.
The introduction of all of these new capabilities, was/is a challenge and of course I had to make decisions on how to keep size down. While at the same time, hearing that some older computers could not even use the existing icons. Therefore, I have chose to use much smaller, in byte count, icons. The remark has also been made that 48x48 icons were too big. I am now using 32x32. Actually I am still open to looking at other/alternative small icons. But size has always been more important to DSL than eye candy.
I have been acused of favoring JWM over fluxbox. Actually I am empathic to the new user of DSL and as such feel they would be more comfortable with JWM. I am using the very latest JWM and since it can share the icons used in DFM, I chose to implement the mini-icons. There is no space wasted by using the icons in JWM. I felt that the advanced user would find it very easy to use the desktop=fluxbox. As well, as the advanced user who doesn't use icons, desktop=fluxbox noicons
Actually, while I have been developing 4.0, I am using SWM as the window manager. This makes me walk the talk in supporting a menu-less document centric computing.