re: Goodbye AfterStep for the Nth Time

Craig Maloney (
Tue, 4 Aug 1998 09:34:13 -0400 (EDT)

Or something like that... :)

I agree with this person as well. I've been following the development of
AfterStep 1.>0 and it's been rather interesting. I've loaded up a few
revisions of it, and I manage to come running back to AfterStep classic.
The default windowing scheme is quite garish (no offense to the
developers, since it's better than I could come up with), the
configuration seems insurmountable, and it doesn't seem like it's worth
the effort to get something together under a system that seems
uncooperative to let you use it. I have used Windowmaker and fled that as
well (I don't like the dock system of earlier versions. Have they changed
much?) but I think I might switch as my love for AfterStep wanes from
revision to revision. Stability is key. Perhaps AfterStep needs a rewrite
like that of Enlightenment. Perhaps the code is too unweildly. Perhaps I
need to put up some code or just shut my mouth (very possible, but I am
not yet used to X windows coding or C for that matter).

Just some public ramblings from someone who thought that 1.0 was the sh!t,
and hasn't felt that way about AfterStep since.

Flame away.

|        Craig Maloney        |      "There are no significant bugs in our    |
|         |     released software that any significant    |
|     |       number of users want fixed." -Gates     |