Should we change rox to other more beautiful ones... ?SOLVED

[`f00]

merely an opinion
Rox simply fits well with Puppy for me. I'd imagine it to be not all that difficult for n00Bs to get used to (even fun once a few things are understood) once they get out of the file-browser mindset. Gosh, after Rox got bookmarks and a mru .. what's not to like?

By all means have alternatives .. about the only thing I miss from the win-way is 'shooting-tree' menus for quick gui rundown (and pretty sure there's a jwm traymenu-something by HairyWill that covers that if I'm not mistaken .. really fast things take a bit of getting used to for me once I get over the )

The drag'n'drop can be iffy if one is a bit clumsy .. a few symlinks I've misplaced from time to time (and sometimes Rox will rarely *move* a file rather than give me the options), bye&large it's all gooD

[disciple]

and ubuntu is trying really hard to be as seamless if not more seamless than Windows.

Windows? Seamless?
We install Windows. Thankfully we don't need to go looking for special drivers. Then we install autocad. Then we install office. Then we spend three days trying to get our Windows computer to talk nicely to our Windows server (i.e. make it actually load a proper roaming profile). Then we spend a day trying to find how to turn off the evil font smoothing everywhere it is possible. It isn't possible everywhere. It isn't possible in Office anymore (That makes this even worse than Vista). Then we sift through our collection of downloaded freeware and open source software, installing a real calculator, a real unit convert, a real image editor, a real browser etc.
Sorry for getting off topic, but if you think Ubuntu is more "seamless" than Puppy because it has more software in its repository, surely it is far more seamless than Windows?

Disclaimer: testing done with latest Windows 7 release candidate. YMMV

and sometimes Rox will rarely *move* a file rather than give me the options

You must be pressing the shift key by mistake.

and truth be told I like Explorer. the detailed information available without having to do anything is really something that should be adopted.

Eh?
I have to change the settings of Explorer for it to show me the details, the same as Rox. Am I missing something?

I can sort music files by name date created, date modified, artist, album, and on and on. makes sorting that random junk which always gathers on your drive easier to go through. Rox doesn't even come close to the convenience

Well you can sort by Name, type, permissions, owner, group, size and last modified in Rox. I can't say I've ever seen options to sort by artist and album in Explorer... how do you get them?

I was very intrigued by the recent suggestion that Jwm/Rox be dropped for LXDE as the Desktop environment on the basic Puppy releases.

I'd be horrified, not intrigued. Openbox and lxpanel used an awful lot more ram than jwm last time I used them, and I've seen more problems with them than benefits. I'm quite keen on promoting an xfce squashfile for people without ancient computers though, as it properly implements "utility window" hints and stuff. It would be good to have a range of well produced "desktop environment" .sfs files - icewm (a pet would be fine I guess), LXDE, xfce... working all the way up to KDE maybe.

[Max Uglee]

I can sort music files by name date created, date modified, artist, album, and on and on. makes sorting that random junk which always gathers on your drive easier to go through. Rox doesn't even come close to the convenience

Well you can sort by Name, type, permissions, owner, group, size and last modified in Rox. I can't say I've ever seen options to sort by artist and album in Explorer... how do you get them?

In XP you simply right click on the bar that you would click to sort things and it gives you a dropdown that lets you check different attributes to display. You said you were using Window$ 7 though so I don't know what to tell you. Not that I like or support M$ at all but to be fair you shouldn't be using an RC for comparison with an official version of something else.

Just curious, what exactly are these problems that you have seen with openbox apart from it using more RAM? I have used it alot and haven't run into any. If you are horrified why would you think an .sfs is a good idea?

[disciple]

You said you were using Window$ 7 though so I don't know what to tell you. Not that I like or support M$ at all but to be fair you shouldn't be using an RC for comparison with an official version of something else.

Yes, but Vista still causes us a lot more grief than Windows 7... thankfully I have XP on my everyday computer - I'm testing it on a spare one.

Just curious, what exactly are these problems that you have seen with openbox apart from it using more RAM?

Little things like stacking order issues where dialogues open behind the main program. To be fair I haven't used it for a while.

If you are horrified why would you think an .sfs is a good idea?

No, I'm only horrified if people want the default Puppy to be more ram hungry.

[Max Uglee]

You said you were using Window$ 7 though so I don't know what to tell you. Not that I like or support M$ at all but to be fair you shouldn't be using an RC for comparison with an official version of something else.

Yes, but Vista still causes us a lot more grief than Windows 7... thankfully I have XP on my everyday computer - I'm testing it on a spare one.

Yea, it's pretty bad that you have to go back to a 7 year old OS to get any kind of stability. Even XP was pretty bad until at least service pack 2. If it werent for Linux I would probably put up with apple's ridiculous proprietary hardware and overpricing and just get a Mac.