In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Francis Burton
on 23 Dec 2005 15:37:03 GMT
Post by Francis Burton Post by Rick
KDE can look very much like OS X. Under the looks, they can be very
Under the looks, can they be very similar? Can KDE be made to
=feel= like OSX?
Erm, dumb question. Linux is a multilayer system in most
distributions, something along the lines of:
Desktop: KDE Gnome
Widgeting: Qt Gtk
Display Abstraction: ? Gdk
Util: OS utilities (mv, cp, rm, tar, man, ...)
Util Libraries: libz
Base Libraries: libc, libm
FreeBSD has a very similar architecture, except for the kernel.
Windows shows a vaguely similar layering, though it's less clear
to me personally:
Windows Applications: Notepad, Word, Office, etc.
Highlevel APIs: ADO WinInet/WinHTTP
Lowlevel APIs: Win32 (includes display & widgeting)
Modules/Drivers: Windows modules (e.g., the NTFS handler)
Kernel: Windows XP kernel
Now I am assuming OSX is a generic term for the lower part of
the system, which includes the kernel, drivers, utilities, and
lowerlevel libraries. Aqua is a term occasionally tossed
about, which presumably is a combination display management/
widgeting layer. There's also the old Quicktime, which presumably
is supported as well (it's analogous to X or Win32).
It is theoretically possible to put Win32 et al over X, and WinE
does exactly that. The look and feel is a bit odd, mostly
because the code within WinE appears to hew more towards
Win 3.1 than towards "modern" Win95, but the functionality
works fairly well. Contrariwise, X can sit over Win32 with
efforts such as Cygnus X. AIUI, X also sits over an OSX layer.
So what is the OSX layering?
It's still legal to go .sigless.