# Vixta: the Linux that looks like Vista!!



## blackpearl (Oct 3, 2007)

Vixta.org is a Fedora-based Linux distribution designed to be user-friendly and eye-catching, similar in look and feel to Windows Vista.

*sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=206087

Screenshots.

*img111.imageshack.us/img111/8769/mycomputerfc2.jpg

*img111.imageshack.us/img111/71/mydocumentsbz9.jpg

*img111.imageshack.us/img111/4785/startol4.jpg

*img111.imageshack.us/img111/1818/vixta0sb1.jpg

*img111.imageshack.us/img111/4770/vixta2bb1.jpg

Full screen of screenshots:
*www.vixta.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=43


----------



## SunnyChahal (Oct 3, 2007)

cool.
nice look.
have u tried it?


----------



## blackpearl (Oct 3, 2007)

Nope. 700MB+ download.


----------



## Gigacore (Oct 3, 2007)

thanks for the info. 
and it looks like a rival for vista in terms of look n feel which comes free of cost


----------



## utsav (Oct 3, 2007)

wow.we all should ask digit to include it in the next issue.


----------



## Dark Star (Oct 3, 2007)

Thanks for the news! But Vista in Linux   The Author need to think again


----------



## lalam (Oct 3, 2007)

Wow!! I'm downloading this off i go to the link....


----------



## Asfaq (Oct 3, 2007)

sweet.. *sets note in google calender to download at a later date


----------



## Garbage (Oct 3, 2007)

Very kooooool...

Let's ask for this with next issue of Digit


----------



## lalam (Oct 3, 2007)

^^ Cool suggestion lets do just that


----------



## Garbage (Oct 3, 2007)

lalam said:
			
		

> ^^ Cool suggestion lets do just that


DONE !!


----------



## Cool G5 (Oct 3, 2007)

Wow.Looks vista's clone.I am also asking digit to provide it.But i feel this is going to start the wars...


----------



## Garbage (Oct 3, 2007)

Wars ??? Why ???


----------



## aditya.shevade (Oct 3, 2007)

^^ Cool.... but I want SuSE 10.3 with the next issue


----------



## praka123 (Oct 3, 2007)

these are all customization..it can look like a Mac with similar functionalities(look for some mac lookalike like mac4lin by infradude).that is where Open Source exails.you can do _whatever_ with ur GNU/Linux distro.
where as u need 3rd party things in windows or even be careful of that may be EULA limits that too.


----------



## Cool G5 (Oct 3, 2007)

shirish_nagar said:
			
		

> Wars ??? Why ???


I mean win fanboys will complain about imitating the vista interface.


----------



## NucleusKore (Oct 3, 2007)

Downloading


----------



## praka123 (Oct 3, 2007)

do ya all forgot the linux-xp?
*www.linux-xp.com/upload/iblock/0f1/0f1e2c5efcba636715ab7699717dbd4f.png
win-xp look a like?
*www.linux-xp.com/


----------



## Sykora (Oct 3, 2007)

OK, I've downloaded it. Now lets see what it can do.


----------



## NucleusKore (Oct 3, 2007)

That was fast! What you have, a T3?
Will wait for your review then download


----------



## Dark Star (Oct 3, 2007)

Ill post a detailed review after I'll d/l it


----------



## mediator (Oct 3, 2007)

WOW fedora based -> Neat!!


----------



## infra_red_dude (Oct 3, 2007)

knew mediator would be the happiest! 

btw, sweet emulation!


----------



## mediator (Oct 3, 2007)

Yea! *www.smileyhut.com/eat_drink/cheers1.gif


----------



## arunks (Oct 4, 2007)

is it worth download?

something special in it? vista look can be given by theme


----------



## azzu (Oct 4, 2007)

^^^ but not the Open source


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Oct 4, 2007)

I want it too.Digit are you listening?


----------



## SunnyChahal (Oct 4, 2007)

me too,
i think i will have to DL it tonight.
BTW has anyone tried?
please post reviews.


----------



## lalam (Oct 4, 2007)

I don't know whats wrong have already downloaded it twice but whenever i try mounting the iso files it reports some sort of an error? Any idea anyone?


----------



## kumarmohit (Oct 4, 2007)

Corrupted ISO?  U hgetting it from torrent or HTTP?

And just thinking why these double standards?

When MS copies some effects and icons from OSX they become chor and devil incarnate and whatever.
When Linux picks up the entire face of Vista, people call it a great job!


----------



## ChaiTan3 (Oct 4, 2007)

kumarmohit said:
			
		

> When MS copies some effects and icons from OSX they become chor and devil incarnate and whatever.
> When Linux picks up the entire face of Vista, people call it a great job!


The matter is not about copying....its whether you charge money for your software after u copy someone elses software.


----------



## lalam (Oct 4, 2007)

kumarmohit said:
			
		

> Corrupted ISO?  U hgetting it from torrent or HTTP?



Corrupted iso likely but i downloaded it two times already. Was downloading it from the link shown on this thread, the original source. Anybody else who already completed downloading this can u please confirm that its not the source file.


----------



## mediator (Oct 4, 2007)

kumarmohit said:
			
		

> Corrupted ISO?  U hgetting it from torrent or HTTP?
> 
> And just thinking why these double standards?
> 
> ...


The term "like" is there!! THis linux looks "like" VISTA hence VIXTA! Did MS say that this looks like OSX?
If someone makes a remix of a song, he isn't labelled as "chor" but if bollywood copies the atif aslam song's tunes, then they r labelled as a copy/"chor". Why??

It also gives proper credit to the distro it is based on!! BTW, copying happens everywhere! But I guess its only the fanboys who term it as "chor" n keep on bragging bt it.


----------



## anandk (Oct 4, 2007)

but why would any linux user want to use a vista-look-alike ???


----------



## Garbage (Oct 4, 2007)

anandk said:
			
		

> but why would any linux user want to use a vista-look-alike ???


many geek users NOT...

But, the beginners to Linux may seem it toooo cool...

So worth to exist !!!


----------



## infra_red_dude (Oct 4, 2007)

anandk said:
			
		

> but why would any linux user want to use a vista-look-alike ???


 legitimate software, cost, runs even on older hardware and lots more reasons 



			
				ChaiTan3 said:
			
		

> The matter is not about copying....its whether you charge money for your software after u copy someone elses software.


 regarding, copying: its not copying something and charging for it that's bad. what's bad is copying something and not giving credit to the original entity. as far as copying is concerned, its ok wid me as long as its acknowledged and the user is benefited.


----------



## nileshgr (Oct 4, 2007)

Cool. Its good for Vista Maddees.  At least Vista ke paagal abhi Vista ke naam par Linux use karengein.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Oct 4, 2007)

Dunno why, but I haf a feeling that MS is gonna sue this for the name: Vixta.


----------



## praka123 (Oct 4, 2007)

@unknown:that is logical.atleast they can be fooled to make them straight(Linux)


----------



## lalam (Oct 4, 2007)

Anybody would u clear my doubt?


----------



## mediator (Oct 5, 2007)

anandk said:
			
		

> but why would any linux user want to use a vista-look-alike ???


 I use fluxbox quite often now! But thats linux for u, giving superb customizabilty!!
Why do u want styleXp, windows blind? For something different? It gives u options to move away from boring default looks of XP. Even with VISTA an end-user wants something different! And here we have our members @sashwat becoming VG of Linux displaying WOWOW in Open source & @infra_dood becoming a legend!!

U have Linux looking very well like OSX with Beryl adding more candy n eye candy to the effects, and here we have VIXTA. There r so many managers like blackbox, fluxbox, icewm, xfce, Kde, gnome etc. Will u ever get bored with it? I haven't finished even with KDE yet!!

Why anyone wud use VISTA like Linux? May be to mock VISTA users that he too is getting the same or more than that but free of cost, FOSS freedom and more efficient.......Just kidding!

I have KDE setup to look like VISTA, another account created to look like OSX following the tutes here. I use them wheneva I get tired of looking the same geeky looking fluxbox that I have setup like such! Neways, why do windows users use almost OSX look alike i.e Aero of VISTA?


----------



## k@®thick (Oct 7, 2007)

this is just gr8...we dont need to have high end graphics card to display transperencies..thanks for the share


----------



## lalam (Oct 7, 2007)

Hey still then can anybody answer my question and tell me if there download works fine for mine didn't though i downloaded it twice so anybody?


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Feb 12, 2008)

bump... anybody knows where I can grab the artwork packages(the themes, wallpapers, cursors and icons) for this distro ? I think this is one of the closest themes to the real thing.


----------



## PCWORM (Feb 12, 2008)

Wow,,,awesome!!!
I hope it is not a resource demanding OS like Vista


----------



## nileshgr (Feb 12, 2008)

PCWORM said:


> Wow,,,awesome!!!
> I hope it is not a resource demanding OS like Vista


Linux has never been resource demanding and never will be. Linux developers always think of old boxes while developing any version of Linux.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Feb 12, 2008)

The Unknown said:


> Linux has never been resource demanding and never will be. Linux developers always think of old boxes while developing any version of Linux.


Linux is a kernel that is very effitient and has a strong stable and optimised for performance architecture. The kernel will forever be able to run with a minimum of 12 mb ram. Only the GUI varies.
And I think this Vixta is either KDE or Gnome, and either when combined with Compiz Fusion(here it has plugins to emulate flip3d or what ever cr@p M$ has put in vista) needs min 256 mb ram, min 1GHz sempron processor and 64 mb video card.(16 also works. I tried it)


----------



## PCWORM (Feb 12, 2008)

The Unknown said:


> Linux has never been resource demanding and never will be. Linux developers always think of old boxes while developing any version of Linux.


My Bad sorry,,ws worried as it used transparency effects...linux rulez

BTW,,,anyone tried this OS?


----------



## Pat (Feb 12, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> Linux is a kernel that is very effitient and has a strong stable and optimised for performance architecture. The kernel will forever be able to run with a minimum of 12 mb ram. Only the GUI varies.
> And I think this Vixta is either KDE or Gnome, and either when combined with Compiz Fusion(here it has plugins to emulate flip3d or what ever cr@p M$ has put in vista) needs min 256 mb ram, min 1GHz sempron processor and 64 mb video card.(16 also works. I tried it)



I wouldnt be running a GNOME or KDE desktop with Compiz fuzion on machines with only 256 MB RAM! It will crawl to death


----------



## The Conqueror (Feb 12, 2008)

Cool


----------



## nileshgr (Feb 12, 2008)

Pat said:


> I wouldnt be running a GNOME or KDE desktop with Compiz fuzion on machines with only 256 MB RAM! It will crawl to death


gone mad ? KDE works on 256 Mb RAM

GNOME works on 128 Mb RAM. I have tried it.


----------



## praka123 (Feb 12, 2008)

^NO!  It needs min 256MB RAM.Gnome may run @128 may be


----------



## nileshgr (Feb 12, 2008)

praka123 said:


> ^NO!  It needs min 256MB RAM.Gnome may run @128 may be


Yeah GNOME is l'll lite on sys


----------



## praka123 (Feb 12, 2008)

both Gnome and Kde are resource hungry as they are full grown Desktop Environments.

Still Gnome runs fine with 128MB memory(Personal experiance) although you cannot expect fancy things(compiz etc) runs on it


----------



## Pat (Feb 12, 2008)

The Unknown said:


> gone mad ? KDE works on 256 Mb RAM
> 
> GNOME works on 128 Mb RAM. I have tried it.



I said KDE + Compiz or GNOME + Compiz! You better go and check it for yourself before commenting..And "works" is a misleading work! Coz if you consider that ways, vista "works" on systems with 512 MB RAM but everyone knows how bad it is!


----------



## The Conqueror (Feb 12, 2008)

Nice effort but Vista is Vista


----------



## praka123 (Feb 12, 2008)

^Yes.Vixta is may be useful to woe Vista users to Linux  esp with Compiz  

anyways Vista is DRM


----------



## SunnyChahal (Feb 12, 2008)

will Ubuntu with compiz run fine with my intel 945 GCCR onboard graphix?


----------



## praka123 (Feb 12, 2008)

^very well


----------



## nileshgr (Feb 12, 2008)

@praka,

edit both links in post #58. both r invalid.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Feb 12, 2008)

Sunny1211993 said:


> will Ubuntu with compiz run fine with my intel 945 GCCR onboard graphix?


I'm not sure, but you need to edit /etc/X11/xorg.cong and find the line which says  Option      “AccelMethod”       “XXA” and change it to  Option      “AccelMethod”       “EXA”.

I suppose this intel chipset was blacklisted in compiz (dunno the status now) coz Intel refused to provide drivers. When open source people volunteered to write drivers themselves Intel refused to give documentation for the chip.

I dunno whats the state now. 965 is surely blacklisted, tho there are methods to make it work under compiz but that results in jerky video playback. Blame Intel for that!


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Feb 12, 2008)

The Unknown said:


> @praka,
> 
> edit both links in post #58. both r invalid.



he discovered a new protocol *htttp* .


----------



## nileshgr (Feb 12, 2008)

The_Devil_Himself said:


> he discovered a new protocol *htttp* .


----------



## hullap (Feb 12, 2008)

lol.
BTW luks cool


----------



## nileshgr (Feb 12, 2008)

Well this was an old thread. Why you guys bumped it ?


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Feb 13, 2008)

praka123 said:


> both Gnome and Kde are resource hungry as they are full grown Desktop Environments.
> 
> Still Gnome runs fine with 128MB memory(Personal experiance) although you cannot expect fancy things(compiz etc) runs on it


if u tweak well, gnome can manage with 96mb.... knoppix is running tweaked kde, so it can manage with 128mb for running kde+ooo and 96 for only kde



The Unknown said:


> Well this was an old thread. Why you guys bumped it ?


my bad. sorry


----------



## hullap (Feb 13, 2008)

post no. 45 bumped it


----------



## Cyrus_the_virus (Feb 13, 2008)

has anyone really tried xfce? _(I guess I spelled that right)_

I've heard that it's the most balanced GUI between effects and resources.


----------



## topgear (Feb 13, 2008)

I'am wondering why digit haven't included it with the mag yet :!

They should also provide linux-xp !

I'll request for the above two distros on next month as this months request period is over


----------



## infra_red_dude (Feb 13, 2008)

Cyrus_the_virus said:


> has anyone really tried xfce? _(I guess I spelled that right)_


Yep, couple of months back. While its a good UI I do find it limiting in some cases. For e.g I cudn't easily create shortcuts on desktops etc. I'm sure small things like that would've been fixed, Rayraven can give us more info as he uses xfce.


----------



## utsav (Feb 14, 2008)

topgear said:


> I'am wondering why digit haven't included it with the mag yet :!
> 
> They should also provide linux-xp !
> 
> I'll request for the above two distros on next month as this months request period is over



maybe MS wil sue them


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Feb 14, 2008)

infra_red_dude said:


> Yep, couple of months back. While its a good UI I do find it limiting in some cases. For e.g I cudn't easily create shortcuts on desktops etc. I'm sure small things like that would've been fixed, Rayraven can give us more info as he uses xfce.


me too use kubuntu-desktop pkg. Xfce overhyped.


----------



## ray|raven (Feb 14, 2008)

Xfce is the best balance between features and resource usage IMO.
I personally feel Gnome is too bloated.
Xfce offers the perfect balance for me,
On my system , gnome uses up abt 100megs on startup,
Xfce is less than 50, With the composite features turned on.
Beat that for resource usage with good looks.

@infra_red_dude,
Creating launchers on the desktop is a wee-bit different than what we are used to.
Instead of right-clicking on the desktop, right-click on a launcher,
and you will get an option to create a new launcher.
This is some what un-traditional and will take getting used to.
However, you could also create launchers on the panel and drag them onto the desktop.
Xfce uses right click menu on desktop to bring up the system menu,
there's no right-click menu like in gnome.

Regards,
ray


----------



## Cyrus_the_virus (Feb 14, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> Xfce overhyped.



Disagree. There is nothing that is overhype about Xfce. It's known for it's low system resource usage and simple interface. It's favorite among system admins for mass deployment in offices for it's simplicity and easy of use.

Heres a new distro called sam linux with the xfce desktop, try it out yourself and give the verdict:
*www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80261


----------



## SunnyChahal (Feb 14, 2008)

im Dling vixta.
il try n tell how it is.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Feb 14, 2008)

Cyrus_the_virus said:


> Disagree. There is nothing that is overhype about Xfce. It's known for it's low system resource usage and simple interface. It's favorite among system admins for mass deployment in offices for it's simplicity and easy of use.
> 
> Heres a new distro called sam linux with the xfce desktop, try it out yourself and give the verdict:
> *www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80261


I use it, and especially when talking about Xubuntu, its a bloat. I guess a bit of tweaking may fix it, but its pointless developing something like it. I think Icebuntu or Fluxbuntu must be made the main ubuntu for low end systems, instead of the stripped down gnome(meaning xfce) running Xubuntu. The only advantage it has is that good apps made for Xubuntu which have innovative resource saving, features, etc can easily be transfered to the main Ubuntu distribution.


----------



## ThinkFree (Feb 14, 2008)

I will try it


----------



## ray|raven (Feb 15, 2008)

@MetalHeadGautham,
Please try before you say smthing like that.
Xfce is no way a stripped down gnome.
Just coz they both use gtk+ libraries doesnt mean xfce is a rip off of gnome.
Get yourself the zenwalk live cd @ www.zenwalk.org
and you'll see how responsive and fast xfce truly is.
Xubuntu is bloated i agree too,
IMO 2 reasons : 
1. They added quite a lot of gnome libraries into it.
2. Ubuntu itself is quite slow to boot,And xubuntu is supposed to be used on older systems and hence boots even slower.

I Also saw a post of urs in the SAM Linux thread, 
The panel look and feel depends on the gtkrc file,
It controls what background is set for the panel and how the buttons behave.
Xfce panel will look no different to the gnome panel on a same theme.
if you want to see how a good xfce panel can look,
Try looking at my screenies in the Screenshot thread.

Regards,
ray


----------

