/mandriva2012.png
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:59:03 -0500
From: shrouded.cl...@gmail.com
To: afrowi...@gmail.com; unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
While I'm sure that is the intent, no, Qt doesn't look 100% native
gt;
>> ----------
>> From: estela...@hotmail.com
>> To: nru...@hotmail.com; merkin...@hotmail.com;
>> unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
>> Subject: RE: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
>> Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 00:32
On 27 February 2012 08:24, Chris Wilson wrote:
> An app that is written in Qt does not automatically have a particular visual
> theme. Instead, Qt inherits the theme of whatever platform it's compiled on.
> When I compile my Qt code on Ubuntu, it always looks like a native GTK+
> based app. I've n
nru...@hotmail.com; merkin...@hotmail.com;
> unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: RE: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
> Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 00:32:46 +
>
> The firefox appearance problem will be no more:
>
> http://www.webupd8.org/2012/02/fi
Why does Ubuntu have a redundant title bar when the Windows and OSX versions
do not?
From: estela...@hotmail.com
To: nru...@hotmail.com; merkin...@hotmail.com; unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: RE: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 00:32
...@hotmail.com; unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: RE: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 00:32:46 +
The firefox appearance problem will be no more:
http://www.webupd8.org/2012/02/firefox-to-get-new-default-theme-other.html
the diff
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 21:59, nick rundy wrote:
> I think the community (at a minimum) needs to ask Mozilla and TDF to change
> toolkits for their Linux offerings. Frankly, Firefox's
> appearance/presentation on Linux is rather pathetic. Just take a look at the
> forums and lots of folks are post
Point taken. I was speaking more to the idea of asking (better word choice =
discuss with) Mozilla (TDF) the concerns and they could pipe in on what they
think or point out why the work would not be worth it. Mozilla good bunch and
they will discuss/consider it if asked to.
> Hi ,
>
> I thi
ng, which presently they are not doing.
From: merkin...@hotmail.com
To: unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 09:22:40 -0500
Subject: Re: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
While I like this idea, it'll probably get a lot of flak from the "LINUX IS
FREEDOM O
rkin...@hotmail.com
To: unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 09:22:40 -0500
Subject: Re: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
While I like this idea, it'll probably get a lot of flak from the "LINUX IS
FREEDOM OF CHOICE!!11" crowd.
>
> Ubuntu isn't about choice though. One of Ubuntu's foundational
> principles was that it would be a Linux distribution where the
> developers make the intelligent, informed decisions so people don't
> have to answer 20 questions just to use it. For instance, only one web
> browser is installed b
On 23 February 2012 15:11, Jonathan Meek wrote:
> See, Ubuntu is still about choice even if this idea for a push is taken up.
Ubuntu isn't about choice though. One of Ubuntu's foundational
principles was that it would be a Linux distribution where the
developers make the intelligent, informed dec
>
> So instead of improving the appearance of, say, the XUL toolkit, you'd
> prefer rewriting Firefox and Thunderbird in a completely different toolkit
> (or, shudder, dropping Firefox in favor of a more "native" browser such as
> Epiphany). Fortunately, that's just not going to happen because, sim
2012/2/23 Jonathan Meek
> Never mind that the toolkit is strongly tied to the functionality and
> appearance.
So instead of improving the appearance of, say, the XUL toolkit, you'd
prefer rewriting Firefox and Thunderbird in a completely different toolkit
(or, shudder, dropping Firefox in favor
On 23. feb. 2012 21:11, Jonathan Meek wrote:
You're right that the vanilla isn't very good. But does that somehow
mean that we can't make it better? Just because those examples are
bad, doesn't preclude the possibility.
Now, don't put words in my mouth: I didn't say make TDF make a GTK
versio
You're right that the vanilla isn't very good. But does that somehow mean
that we can't make it better? Just because those examples are bad, doesn't
preclude the possibility.
Now, don't put words in my mouth: I didn't say make TDF make a GTK version
of LibreOffice. I did say there was room for exc
This discussion is rather ridiculous.
If you an desktop environment built on a single toolkit, install a distro
that ships a vanilla Gnome 3.2 (Evolution, Epiphany, Gnome Shell, Gnome
Office, etc) or KDE 4.8 (KMail, Konqueror, KWin, Caligra, etc).
What you are looking for is already there and, fr
roving how the toolkits (and apps) integrate better.
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 05:40:27 -0500
From: shrouded.cl...@gmail.com
To: unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
I was greeted by a small surprise today in updating my Precise machi
Subject: Re: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Precision, and the Future
While I like this idea, it'll probably get a lot of flak from the "LINUX IS
FREEDOM OF CHOICE!!11" crowd.
Are we supposed to tell The Document Foundation/Mozilla/etc "hey you want to
make an Ubuntu
On 23. feb. 2012 18:30, Chris wrote:
That "freedom of choice" crowd can take it some place where the sun
doesn't shine. I don't mean to offense of course, even thou my words
sound very harsh.
[snip]
Thoughts?
I may have a few, but I guess I'll leave you with one: "Is this the
right
, made by *GNOME*
> Firefox, made by *Mozilla*
> LibreOffice made by *The Document Foundation*
>
>
>
> ----------
> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 05:40:27 -0500
> From: shrouded.cl...@gmail.com
> To: unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: [Unity-design
ial Ubuntu
Control Panel, made by GNOME (Canonical?)
Rhythmbox, made by GNOME
Firefox, made by Mozilla
LibreOffice made by The Document Foundation
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 05:40:27 -0500
From: shrouded.cl...@gmail.com
To: unity-design@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: [Unity-design] Ubuntu, Toolkits, Pr
I was greeted by a small surprise today in updating my Precise machines: a
new version of Ubuntu One controls that is made using Qt. All well enough,
as it can make it much easier to share code with the Windows version of the
app... But there are still some consequences.
First of all, this brings
23 matches
Mail list logo
