Subject: FVWM: fvwm95/winNT look and feel differences

From: "Schwarting, Irene S" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 14:32:10 -0700

Isn't the idea for FVWM95 to look like WinNT? 
I'm working on developing a catalog of the differences between wvfm95 and NT,
the aspects of the NT interface which *cannot* be implemented in a Unix
environment. I am particularly interested in the "look and feel" differences
which can induce user problems when the behavior of the environment does not
match expectations. For instance, why do you use Motif...what are the problems
you find occurring because "FVWM95 and WinNT4.0 look just too much alike?" Any
feedback would be appreciated. Respond privately, if there is interest I will
compile the differences for the list. 
Thanks,

Irene Schwarting
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Richland, WA 99352
[email-masked]

	Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 10:01:37 -0400 (EDT)
	From: Barry James <[email-masked]>
	Subject: Re: [FVWM95] porting fvwm95 to win32

	Use CygWin32 library.  You will have to do *little* porting.  In fact, I
	believe fvwm is already ported, although I have to admit when I use NT
and
	an XServer, I prefer Motif (because FVWM95 and WinNT4.0 look just too
much
	alike).  You can get CygWin32 free from Cygnus at URL:
	http://www.cygnus.com

	Barry L James		| Mikrotec Internet Services, Inc (AS3801)
	Director R & D		| 1001 Winchester Rd
	[email-masked]		| Lexington KY 40505
	http://www.mis.net/	| 606/225.2993   800/875.5095
	Member AAAI, IEEE # 40277528
	- ---

--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Michael Hucka <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 18:08:43 -0400 (EDT)

>>>>> On 20 Apr 1998, "Schwarting, Irene S" <[email-masked]> wrote:

  SIS> I'm working on
  SIS> developing a catalog of the differences between wvfm95 and NT, the
  SIS> aspects of the NT interface which *cannot* be implemented in a Unix
  SIS> environment.

Are you kidding?  I seriously doubt that there is anything of WindowsNT that
"cannot" be implemented in a UNIX environment.  I think it's quite the
opposite.

If there's something that hasn't been implemented, I think it's much more
likely to be because no one has spent the time doing it, not because it's
technically impossible.

--
Mike Hucka    [email-masked]    http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~hucka    University
 PhD to be, computational models of human visual processing (AI Lab)     of
   UNIX systems administrator & programmer/analyst (EECS DCO)         Michigan
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: "David E. Brooks Jr" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 18:45:21 -0400 (EDT)

Irene's message reminded me of something I would very much like to be
able to do in FVWM: Duplicate the ALT+TAB behavior of Windows 95 as
much as possible.  The closest I've been able to come is to specify

     Key Tab	A	M	Next [*] Focus

in my .fvwmrc (well, okay, .fvwm95rc, but the behavior seems to be the
same in stock FVWM), but this only seems to alternate between the two
most recent windows (most of the time, there are exceptions).  It's
close enough when I'm working with two windows, and something of a
headache if a third window comes into play.

For those unaware, Windows 95's (and it's relative Windows NT 4.0)
ALT+TAB works like this: When the ALT key is depressed, a box appears
in the middle of the screen with an icon for each window.  Keeping ALT
held and tapping TAB will advance an outline cursor within the window
to the next icon in the list.  Releasing ALT raises the window and
gives it focus.  The ordering is important too.  Non-iconized windows
are first in the list, followed by iconized windows.

Is there anything else I can try in my .fvwmrc to duplicate some of
this behavior, or should I investigate writing a module to do this?
(Starting with FvwmWinList as a starting point, of course).  I could
care less about looking like Windows 95--It's the functionality I'm
after.

-- Dave

> compile the differences for the list. 

David E. Brooks Jr			mailto:[email-masked]
Tantalus Incorporated			http://members.iglou.com/dbj/
130 Fairfax Avenue, Suite 1D		
Louisville, KY 40207			finger [email-masked] for public key

---

From: Michael M Han <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 16:26:47 -0700

Well, that's something that's always nagged at me as something I'd
like to be able to do. The trouble I've always seen is that fvwm's
keybindings don't seem to allow you to specify that it do something on
a keypress, react to other keypresses until it receives the release on
the key, and then finish up the binding... And in general, it might be
undesirable to specify that fvwm "watch" ALT keystrokes to see if it
catches a TAB... Though I suppose a different key could also be
used. I've always suspected that some fairly important parts of fvwm's
core would need to be changed to get it to emulate the Windows ALT-TAB
behavior.

I'm not even sure that a module could do what's desired, unless the
module actually ran in the background looking for key events, the way
FvwmAuto works...

Incidentally, if you're trying to emulate the Windows behavior, it's
helpful to add:

Key Tab	A	SM	Prev [*] Focus

That way you're not limited to just two windows...

Previously...
>headache if a third window comes into play.
_________
mike ([email-masked])
Mud is not one of the 4 food groups
 - The collected wisdom of Bart Simpson
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: "Frank Wilcox, Jr." <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 22:20:28 -0400

On Apr 20, 18:45, David E. Brooks Jr wrote:
> Subject: Re: FVWM: fvwm95/winNT look and feel differences
> much as possible.

i, too, would love to have alt-tab ability...but am too new to fvwm to even
attempt to implement it myself.

> I could care less about looking like Windows 95--It's the functionality I'm
> after.

i'd take that one step further:  the LAST thing i want is a win95 look-alike.

while i'm on the subject:  can i use fvwm2 in place of "program manager" (i
don't think it's called that anymore, but i'll use it for lack of a better
phrase) in win95?  My Dad's buying me a computer.  It's a really good buy,
but as a consequence (sp?) i have to accept win95as the OS.

-- 
Frank Wilcox, Jr. (a.k.a. _____)

can be found in #Friends on the undernet

------------------------------------------------------
Safe upon the solid rock the ugly houses stand:
Come and see my shining palace built upon the sand!
		-Edna St. Vincent Millay

Matt 8:24-7

---

From: Kendrick Vargas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 22:33:50 -0400 (EDT)

> Isn't the idea for FVWM95 to look like WinNT? 

although this isn't the fvwm95 list, I'll go with it.

> which can induce user problems when the behavior of the environment does not

There really isn't ANYTHING that "cannot" be implemented in a Unix
environment. That's all left up to the software you're using. In fact,
most of the stuff that FVWM95 "cannot" do is better off being left undone.

> compile the differences for the list. 

Well, 
	have you seen Xclass? It's a widget set (like motif is) that has
the win95 look/feel. Check out fox.unixville.com for more information.
Otherwise, motif is dead or at least should be. It costs too much and
there are better alternatives (Xclass, GTK, etc)
			-peace

--- BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK ------------+-----------
GAT d- s:+ !a C+(+++) UI/L/S/B++(+++) | "In the morning glad I see
P>+ L+(++) E---- W+++ N+ o? K? w++++  |  My foe outstrech'd beneath the tree."
O--- M-- V PS+++@ PE Y-- PGP+ t++ 5   |               -The Poison Tree
X++ R- tv+ b DI++ D+ G e>*  h*(!) r-  |                William Blake
y*(+) ------ END GEEK CODE BLOCK -----+

---

From: Kendrick Vargas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 22:40:44 -0400 (EDT)

> but as a consequence (sp?) i have to accept win95as the OS.

Well, if there's no way that you can install linux alongside the windows
95 installation, then use the following:

	http://anandtech.com/litestep

It's afterstep for windows 95. It replaces explorer (the wm) and uses less
or as-much memory depending on the settings. 

You should really look into installing linux (one of the most popular
FREE unix-like operating systems systems available, and in most cases,
more advanced than commercial unices) on your computer. It is 32-bit true
multitasking, etc, etc... and runs on intel. You can get a Linux CD for as
little as $7 (including shipping) from www.lsl.com ... 

Once you install that, you can install any window manager you want. 
			-peace

---

From: "Frank Wilcox, Jr." <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 22:58:02 -0400

> Once you install that, you can install any window manager you want.

ok...before anyone else tells me to install linux:  i plan on it...but not
until this summer.  i have three weeks left of classes, i know win95 (as much
as i hate to admit it), but i don't know linux, yet (in fact, i've only been
using unix for this one semester).  so as soon as the semester ends and i
have some time (<time, what a lovely thought>) i'm going to install (and
learn) linux.

in the mean time: i've tried afterstep and didn't like it, that's why i'm
using fvwm2, so i'd like to be able to use on my new pc until i get linux.

btw my best friend suggested red hat, what'do y'all think?  (since this is
off-topic, please send me personal e-mails instead of posting to the group)

thanx

Matt 8:24-7

---

From: Kendrick Vargas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 23:10:32 -0400 (EDT)

> using fvwm2, so i'd like to be able to use on my new pc until i get linux.

Well, as far as I know, the only windows shell replacement that is
available is litestep. What don't you specifically like about afterstep
that cannot be modified? 

The reason I say this is because noone is porting fvwm2 to windows95/NT. I
know someone is porting FVWM95 (or trying to) but I really don't see the
point and am not even sure if they started or not. It's a real job to
change the window handling protocols from X11 to windows. Therefore, If
you don't like afterstep, then don't really expect to find anything else.

There really shouldn't be much difficulty making afterstep look similar to
fvwm2 (I mean, afterstep DID start as fvwm1 + some mods).

> off-topic, please send me personal e-mails instead of posting to the group)

redhat is nice and easy and $40-50 if you order the commercial version. If
you order it from www.lsl.com (the free version which doesn't come with a
commercial Xserver and commercial web browser -- Red Barron) it'll cost
you less. In fact, you can order EACH of the distributions (They call
their package "Tri-Linux") plus S/H for under $10. Not a bad deal. 
If you want to wait a bit, Netscape wants to create a distribution of
Linux which will compete with Windows NT. That should be interesting :)

In anycase, as a bit of warning. Expect to eventually trash your first
installation of linux if you're a newbie. Everyone does. Mine was with an
accidental recursive delete from the root directory. :)
			-peace

---

From: [email-masked] (Joshua E Ross)
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 21:58:02 -0600

I think Red hat is great. But i love Caldera's Open linux. I have tested
it, and it is the best!
Fvwm rules. Anyone know of a place to get it for Windows? I hate windows,
but it runs all of my programs.

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

---

From: Rainer Koehler <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:00:32 +0200

David E Brooks writes:

> Irene's message reminded me of something I would very much like to
> be able to do in FVWM: Duplicate the ALT+TAB behavior of Windows 95
> as much as possible.  The closest I've been able to come is to
> specify

> in my .fvwmrc (well, okay, .fvwm95rc, but the behavior seems to be
> the same in stock FVWM), but this only seems to alternate between
> the two most recent windows (most of the time, there are
> exceptions).  It's close enough when I'm working with two windows,
> and something of a headache if a third window comes into play.

> ALT+TAB works like this: When the ALT key is depressed, a box
> appears in the middle of the screen with an icon for each window.
> Keeping ALT held and tapping TAB will advance an outline cursor
> within the window to the next icon in the list.  Releasing ALT
> raises the window and gives it focus.  The ordering is important
> too.  Non-iconized windows are first in the list, followed by
> iconized windows.

> care less about looking like Windows 95--It's the functionality I'm

I got a little bit more of the desired behaviour by using FvwmIconMan.
Here are the relevant parts of my .fvwm2rc:

Key Tab		A	M	Module FvwmIconMan Transient

*FvwmIconMan*action	Key Tab    A bif Next 3, gotobutton 0, select, ret, gotobutton Next, select
*FvwmIconMan*action	Key Return N sendcommand "Iconify -1, Focus, WarpToWindow 42p 10p"
*FvwmIconMan*action	Key Escape N quit
#
*FvwmIconMan*transient*buttongeometry	420x0
*FvwmIconMan*transient*action	Key Return N sendcommand "Iconify -1, Focus, WarpToWindow 42p 10p", quit

This shows a list of windows under the mouse cursor if you hit (and
release) Alt-Tab.  Then, you can cycle through the list with Tab and
select a window with Return.  You shouldn't use Alt-Tab to cycle
through the windows, because fvwm sees this and tries to start another
FvwmIconMan.  Maybe one can avoid that by dynamically reconfiguring
the key bindings, but I didn't bother.

As was already said, it's probably necessary to change fvwm's
internals to make it react on the pressing of Alt alone, and I'm not
sure if I really want to use my Alt key for a single feature.

Hope this helps,
Rainer

---

From: "Frank Wilcox, Jr." <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 23:14:12 -0400

On Apr 20, 16:26, Michael M Han wrote:
>-- End of excerpt from Michael M Han

i put that in, but it doesn't seem to do anything...do i need both lines?
...does it not use alt-tab?

Matt 8:24-7

---

From: Bob Woodside <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 21:01:04 -0400 (EDT)

On 24-Apr-98 Frank Wilcox, Jr. wrote:
      [FW = Frank, DB = Dave Brooks, MH = Mike Han]
DB>> > I would...like...to...Duplicate the ALT+TAB behavior of Windows 95...
DB>> > The closest I've been able to come...
DB>> >
DB>> >     Key Tab        A       M       Next [*] Focus
DB>> >
DB>> > but this only seems to alternate between the two most recent windows
DB>> > (most of the time, there are exceptions)....

        It took me a while to figure out how to duplicate this...

        The problem here is that you're using some version of mousey-focus
(MouseFocus or SloppyFocus), which butts heads with window list circulation
when you cycle to a window that happens to lie under the mouse cursor. The
FocusFollowsMouse policy takes precedence when FVWM tries to decide where
to assign focus, and this messes up the cycling order. When you cycle to a
window that's under the mouse cursor, try moving the mouse cursor out of
the window onto the desktop, then try to continue cycling with Alt-Tab
(or whatever key combo you'd like to use).

        The code may be slightly buggy: this aberration in the cycling
order only seems to happen when you're switching to a different desktop
or page and land on a window under the mouse cursor. I haven't looked at
this area of the code in a good while, and my memory of it is a bit hazy,
so I can't comment on whether this is really a bug without looking into it
a bit more. But move the mouse and you should be able to continue cycling
through all the windows.

MH>> Incidentally...it's helpful to add:
MH>>
MH>> Key Tab      A       SM      Prev [*] Focus
MH>>
MH>> That way you're not limited to just two windows...
MH>> ...
FW> i put that in, but it doesn't seem to do anything...do i need both lines?
FW> ...does it not use alt-tab?

        All this does is to give you *another* keyboard shortcut to circulate
through the list backwards with Shift-Alt-Tab. It's a very nice convenience,
but it doesn't alter the behavior that started this thread. (Well, it may
appear to, since you may be able to get to more windows by traversing the
list in reverse. Then, again, you may not.)

DB ? >> ...

        Finally, the original poster (Dave, I think) mentioned having a window-
list window pop up. Is there something about the plain old WindowList command
that you don't like, apart from its not having icons? Try this binding:

        Key Tab          R       M       WindowList

(change the "R" to an "A" if you prefer). You can scroll through the popup
list with the cursor movement keys and then hit Enter, or just click directly
on the window you want to go to. I think this is much quicker than Windows'
approach, since I can select the target window with whatever's closest to
my right hand...and it gives you more information about the windows.