Linux better than Win'95: HOW!

Linux better than Win'95: HOW!

Post by Guillaume Lauren » Tue, 10 Oct 1995 04:00:00




>    4) STANDARDIZE THE WINDOW INTERFACE!!! Let's converge to Motif
>       (no problems with licenses: Qt are pretty good free
>            Motif-compatable libraries),
>       STOP WITH THE WINDOW MANAGERS (twm, mwm, openlook) and widget
>       (Athena or whatever) PROLIFERATION!!! THIS JUST CONFUSES PEOPLE!
>            Let's choose an interface similar to Windows (maybe better),
>            'cause people got acquainted with it.

I'm not quite sure of what you mean here. Are you saying all apps
should be linked with the same widget library, and that others WMs
than mwm should be dumped ?

I may be wrong here, but It looks like you want to suppress one of the
nicest (IMHO) features of X (regardless of the OS it's running under),
and one that greatly helped its success. Restricting users to "one and
only" look-and-feel, without letting them change it as deeply as they
want, is something a lot of users I know (including myself) are very
touchy about.

If, on the other hand, you mean to standardize distributions, but
still let users open access to customisation, then fine.

BTW, I believe most of what you're talking about is addressed by
Caldera (and/or CDE).
--
--
                        Guillaume

 
 
 

Linux better than Win'95: HOW!

Post by Annius Groeni » Wed, 11 Oct 1995 04:00:00



>Of course not. 90% of my windows are xterms, I work 10 times faster in
>a text base shell (tcsh) anyway. I use emacs (course) no drag an drop  
>support (like I really care).

There one goes.  X11 was designed for people who need just 1 window
(an xterm running Emacs), but have too much space on their screens
(the workstation vendor's fault), and want to use the extra space
to put * colour pictures in the background.

All the philosophy about window manager and inter client communication
is designed around the idea that the user never touches the mouse
(the focus doesn't need to go out of the Emacs window anyway).

Just being provocative.

--


1098 SJ Amsterdam  | Room M233 ext. 4077     | NL 1100 AB Amsterdam
The Netherlands    | Phone:  +31 20 592 4077 | Phone: +31 20 695 9901

 
 
 

Linux better than Win'95: HOW!

Post by Atle Helgenes » Wed, 11 Oct 1995 04:00:00





>> 4) STANDARDIZE THE WINDOW INTERFACE!!! Let's converge to Motif
>>    (no problems with licenses: Qt are pretty good free
>>            Motif-compatable libraries),
>>    STOP WITH THE WINDOW MANAGERS (twm, mwm, openlook) and widget
>>    (Athena or whatever) PROLIFERATION!!! THIS JUST CONFUSES PEOPLE!
>>            Let's choose an interface similar to Windows (maybe better),
>>            'cause people got acquainted with it.

>I'm not quite sure of what you mean here. Are you saying all apps
>should be linked with the same widget library, and that others WMs
>than mwm should be dumped ?

>I may be wrong here, but It looks like you want to suppress one of the
>nicest (IMHO) features of X (regardless of the OS it's running under),
>and one that greatly helped its success. Restricting users to "one and
>only" look-and-feel, without letting them change it as deeply as they
>want, is something a lot of users I know (including myself) are very
>touchy about.

>If, on the other hand, you mean to standardize distributions, but
>still let users open access to customisation, then fine.

We seem to be going a bit past just standarize dist. But not more than
that you can ript it out of you . files and get what you want. I'm
using HP VUE (a motif superset) dayli at work. It is nice, a fairly good
file man. for what I could see the 5 minutes I have used it. The editor
is small, simple and does the few thing an occational user need. The
front panel config tool, has about teh same things that sun openlook
config tool had. colors, background, click-to-focus/focus-follows-mouse
options, etc. A usable hypertext help app. and more. For a first time
user it must be fairly nice. BUT DO YOU THINK I COULD LIVE WITH THAT
FOR MORE THAT A DAY?????

Of course not. 90% of my windows are xterms, I work 10 times faster in
a text base shell (tcsh) anyway. I use emacs (course) no drag an drop  
support (like I really care). However plain users tend to like these
things. Users like that when you install MS mail a "send." entry
appears in words file menu. (I'm horrid of that kind of coding is used
by MS to get this done). write a document, push send and you
teleports into mail where your friendly (ha) mailer asks, "kind sir
where would thy like to send this mail? (X.400 and SMTP are supported
bye our mail gateways for a modest price, as long as you have a
dedicated PC, read: batteries not included)".  

Our basic problem that stopps X from gaining mass public recognition is
stated in the ICCCM doc "It was an explicit design goal of X version 11
to specify mechanism, not policy." And did they succed!!!! We have one
of the most robust pieces of SW ever made (TeX is better), it is
extendable, it is obe of the few client server sollutions that works,
and nothing that regulated look and feel, nor client to client
communications. So for the first years we flew around like decapitated
chickens, with the first wm (horrid) twm (much better) Xaw (not bad,
but lacked grace) before we got things like Interviews, andrew, etc,
and of course Motif. Motif was the first steps with a purpose, only too
bad that OSF shoot them selves in the foot by charging money for it.

If linux is to continue to grow, X must evolve. There MUST be a uniform
core of simple tools base on a single widget (neccessarely motif), look
at the std tools in win3.x and win95, it's not much.
calendar - there is a nice tool called plan (I was impressed) may be
too much
calculator - there is bound to be a nice one out there
notepad - emacs is probably too much, atleast it needs the motif file
browser
clipboard - xcliboard only handles only text as far as i recall.
xspread needs a face lift but is otherwise nice (I never have a use for
spreadsheets, so I don't really know)

What we do lack is a half a decent word processor (WYSIWYG that is)
something better than write and less that word.
(Ideally I wish for something that uses TeX as engine, has a good X
frontend, and convert to and from word/wp, handles LaTeX, plain TeX,
texinfo, and html. And a lot cheaper than frame.   yeah yeah
fatamorgana).

Is this too much to hope for? Are we too disorganized to pull this off?
Are Linux destined to be a side not in the computer history?
Are our only hope for salavtion from MS that the US gov. will use the
anti thrust axe on MS, look how long it took before they took ma bell!

Even if I hate MS's guts and win95 is a grand looking castle built with
clay instead of cement, and put on top a quicksand lake, you have to
give them credit for win3.x and win95 use of OLE. The ability to import
objects from other apps is a must for a windowing system, does anyone
know how far away we are in X to get this?

Terje

 
 
 

Linux better than Win'95: HOW!

Post by Anthony Rossi » Thu, 12 Oct 1995 04:00:00



> All the philosophy about window manager and inter client communication
> is designed around the idea that the user never touches the mouse
> (the focus doesn't need to go out of the Emacs window anyway).

Of course not -- Emacs is the _One_True_Environment_ (tm), after all.

The question soon becomes which of the many frames to use --
therefore, while the focus never leaves the Emacs process, it never
needs to stay in the same window :-).

Quote:> Just being provocative.

Huh?  Nothing provocative in that...

-tony
--
------
Anthony Rossini                               Department of Statistics

http://www.stat.sc.edu/~rossini/         Columbia, SC 29208
http://www.biostat.washington.edu/~arossini/  803-777-3578(O) ..7-4048 (fax)