What IS GNOME?

[gearjunkie]

First off, a bit of background.. I've had mandrake 8.0 dual booted on my IBM thinkpad for about a year, but I'm still just in the 'fooling around with it' stage, since I need sooooo many windows-specific apps for school. But, I'm planning on doing a clean install on my new desktop when my copy of Mdk9.0 comes in the mail.

So, my question is as follows:
What is GNOME? and what functionalities do you get when using it over just a window manager? I've been playing around with the different window managers a bit, and these are my impressions:

KDE seems like it's some sort of complete package, like a menu-system, and a window manager in one (or can you run other window managers with the KDE menus?). Then there's stuff like fluxbox, blackbox, and enlightenment, which also seem like a complete system in themselves, that just use a different system of keeping the menus (click on desktop, instead of a 'sticky' menu system) Then there's GNOME, which doesn't seem to fit either place.....
Does it just add the menu system overtop of another window manager? Or are there actually programs that you can't run without GNOME running over top of a window manager? What are other functionalities you get when using GNOME with something like fluxbox, instead of just fluxbox by iteself?

Thanks in advance!
-Nathan

[Jomboni]

Gnome is supposed to be a "total package" like KDE. I don' t know what version of Gnome Mandrake 8 uses but it's probably 1.4 or 1.2, which aren't as good as 2.0, which you'll be able to try when you get your Mandrake 9 discs!

[bskahan]

there are several things gnome.
(kde is similar and has similar components which will be indicated next to their gnome equivalents in () below)

GNOME libraries - all gnome programs share the same libraries, both the gnome (kde), and GTK libraries (qt). This provides a unified "feel" and UI across applications, and in some cases allows programs to use the same memory, more efficiently allocating resources.

GNOME or GTK programs - most of users can't tell the difference between the 2, the distinction is whether or no a program uses the actual gnome libraries which do alot of behind the scenes things.

GNOME-desktop - this is what you were initially asking about. This is supposed to be a complete user environment, it provides interproccess communication (ie you can cut and paste happily, word proccessors can include images, filemanagers can render html). It also includes a collection of usabilty applications like the panel (or taskbar in windows parlance), a file manager (and icons on the desktop), a menu system, themes, etc.

things to consider:
there are a number of threads about the differemces between KDE and GNOME, you might want to read some of them to get a feel.

They provide the same thing. personal preferances aside, they are basically the same things - user environments.

KDE 2.2 - 3 were released before gnome 2 and both of these versions of KDE are much better than gnome 1. However, now GNOME2 has been released and there is no clear "better".

Mandrake is a KDEcentric distobution. This is not a bad thing, its just the way it is. I think mandrake's default setup of KDE 2 is much nicer than the default setup for GNOME 1.

Mandrake 9 includes GNOME2 and KDE3 both are much better than their respective previous versions.

About window managers:
KDE uses (by default) its own window manager, gnome 1 used either enlightenment or sawfish.
GNOME2 uses metacity (which will felel more integrated) or sawfish which is way more powerful.
But in either case, the WM is seperate from the envirnment and can be changed.

[gearjunkie]

Thanks a lot, that makes things a bit clearer. I guess I wasn't seeing the distinction between the 'desktop environment' and the 'window manager' because they appear to be the same thing.

As far as Gnome-desktop environment goes, do most of the features you talked about work as long as you're using a GNOME-compliant window manager? For instance, if I'm using sawfish vs. metacity, I should be able to have icons on the desktop, cut and paste, and apply themes similarly if I'm using either one?

Also, which program controls the desktop? Does the window manager control just the windows and how they work (minimize, maximize, organization) or does it also control the desktop stuff? (icons, where it goes when it's minimized)

I guess basically I'm having a hard time telling where one stops and the other starts.

-Nathan

[bskahan]

I guess basically I'm having a hard time telling where one stops and the other starts.

don't feel bad, so do most of the people who design window managers ;)

a good way to get a feel for what the window manager does is to try running some of the simpler ones, or running X without one.

running X without a window manager:
its possible to start X without a wm, you will see a "grey" screen, and the mouse pointer iirc. But the mouse won't do anything you can move it around, but there's nothing else.

now if you switch back to the command line (Ctrl-Alt-F1) you can start a program, we'll use xterm. Alot of programs will take a display argument so they know where to open. Try "xterm -display :0" now go back to X (Alt-F7).
You should see a terminal wondow, the mouse still won't do anything, you can type in the window and start new programs. But you probably won't be able to get to them because X has no focus control.

now that we know where we are without a wm:
a basic wm provides a way to deal with mouse clicks, focus, and key-bindings, usually it will put a frame around windows so that they can be moved.

moving up from there:
window managers can add mouse menus, virtual desktops, a way to minimize windows, maximise windows. the theme hear is windows though - no icons, no desktop.

then there are window managers that blur the line like Enlightenment. still no icons, comfortable environment, sawfish, fluxbox, etc can all do this too. Metacity and the KDE window manager do not fit in this category, they rely on the desktop environment for things like menus and keybindings.

In GNOME 1 gnome or nautilus can control the "desktop" icons, mouse menus, etc can come from either one (mouse menus can come from sawfish too, what a mess).
In GNOME 2 icons on the desktop are drawn by nautlius (a file manager) as are mouse menus. By using a weaker wm (Metacity) by default gnome2 gets rid of some of this overlap (which is the same tactic KDE uses).

--
I'm thinking seriously about writing a wm, so I've thought about this alot recently.

[gearjunkie]

Okay, I think that answers my question, or at least as much as it can be. :)
I'll definitely have to try what you said about running something in X without a wm. That's really cool, and it makes sense now how much more customizable all the window managers are in linux as opposed to windows. (and how diverse they all are!)
Thanks a lot for the info!
-Nathan