New GUI tool for Linux. [idea]

New GUI tool for Linux. [idea]

Post by Maurizio Ferrar » Tue, 28 Apr 1998 04:00:00





Quote:> While everybody is building huge mounds of software to rival Windows, what
> *I* need is a GUI that is _fast_, simple and small.  If anyone here has used
> Acorn's WIMP GUI they will know that kind of thing I'm talking about.

I do (see my headers :-) ) and I think it is by far still the best GUI
I have come across (not that I know all of them of course, but I have used
CDE, Windows, several X windows managers)

RISC OS GUI bolted on Linux is too much to hope for!

Maurizio
--
Office:  Galileo Engineering Via Zacchetti 6 I-42100 Reggio Emilia Italy
                            phone/fax:+39 522 920496
Home:        Maurizio Ferrari Via Pareto 12 I-42020 Albinea RE Italy
                            phone/fax:+39 522 347118

 
 
 

New GUI tool for Linux. [idea]

Post by James Youngma » Tue, 28 Apr 1998 04:00:00




  >>> Personally, I think it's all a waste of time, as SVGAlib is dead
  >>> and should remain that way.

  G> Hope not - it's the only resource available for creating very
  G> light weight semi-portable Linux GUIs.

  Alan> Well, fact is, it basically is dead.

  Alan> I also mentioned GGI in my post, which has the advantage of
  Alan> people actually working on it (as well as intended stability
  Alan> and other useful thing).  What's wrong with it?

What's wrong with it is that (as last I heard) Linus isn't going to
allow KGI to go into the kernel.   Hence it would have no hope of
becoming a replacement for SVGAlib.  

Naturally, GGI will still work, and still allow graphics over X, etc.

 
 
 

New GUI tool for Linux. [idea]

Post by Maurizio Ferrar » Tue, 28 Apr 1998 04:00:00






> > While everybody is building huge mounds of software to rival Windows, what
> > *I* need is a GUI that is _fast_, simple and small.  If anyone here has used
> > Acorn's WIMP GUI they will know that kind of thing I'm talking about.

> I do (see my headers :-) ) and I think it is by far still the best GUI
> I have come across (not that I know all of them of course, but I have used
> CDE, Windows, several X windows managers)

> RISC OS GUI bolted on Linux is too much to hope for!

> Maurizio

Forgot to say, I used MacOS a little as well.

Also, I should add, RISC OS has a few things any GUI developer should
study carefully:

1) A vector graphics standard throughout the whole apps (Drawfiles)
   and modules to render them on screen
2) A superb font renderer with anti-aliasing (which is I think one of
   Acorn's major assets)
3) Image filing systems (more an OS issue than a GUI one, admittedly)
   such that, provided the appropriate module is loaded, a gzip/tar/zip
   etc...  file can be treated exactly like a directory

I hope  things like KDE and GNOME will/do provide the same level of
functionality.

Cheers

Maurizio
--
Office:  Galileo Engineering Via Zacchetti 6 I-42100 Reggio Emilia Italy
                            phone/fax:+39 522 920496
Home:        Maurizio Ferrari Via Pareto 12 I-42020 Albinea RE Italy
                            phone/fax:+39 522 347118

 
 
 

New GUI tool for Linux. [idea]

Post by nathan wagn » Tue, 28 Apr 1998 04:00:00




Quote:> An X system is devoid of value if it is merely a protocol sitting in
> books on the shelf; it must be expressed as implementation in order to
> be of any use.  Calling X a protocol may be correct, but ignoring the
> software is rather silly.

Well, i certainly didn't mean to be silly.  Rather i was trying to express
my confusion about everyone's criticism.  It would seem that if there is a
problem with Xlib, or a particular widget set, then the criticism should be
leveled at that offending party.  Instead what i see is variations on "X
sucks".  When there is a specific criticism at all, it is along the lines of
"X sucks because it doesn't do foo."  And all i can think is gee, X
shouldn't do foo, but if you need to, write a library that allows you to do
it.

Quote:> All known implementations (and I'd be entertained to hear of any
> counterexamples) are based at some point on MIT and/or X Consortium
> code.

Ok.  Again i am confused.  Are you talking about the server or Xlib, or
both?  But let's suppose that in my copious free time i want to reimplement
something from scratch.  What?  Is the problem with Xlib?  Or is the problem
with the server?  What should be reimplemented, and why?  By "why" i am
asking what are the specific problems with the existing implementations, not
why should it be done.

Quote:> The point is that it is simply *too large* for a 386 system with 8MB of
> RAM to happily run along with any interestingly complex applications.
> And that is is the sort of "throwaway system of five years ago" that
> one sees.

I don't think (nor do you, if i've interpreted your web page correctly) that
this is a solvable problem.  If you want all the features, you need a
certain minimum level of hardware.  Fortunately that hardware is fairly
cheap these days.

[The link to the good enough is best essay in your unix01.html page is
broken, BTW]

--
nathan wagner             "People with neckwear always have money."

-- looking for a *NIX sysadmin job within driving distance of Madison WI
   resume at http://granicus.if.org/~nw/resume.html

 
 
 

New GUI tool for Linux. [idea]

Post by Christopher Brow » Wed, 29 Apr 1998 04:00:00




>  Alan> I also mentioned GGI in my post, which has the advantage of
>  Alan> people actually working on it (as well as intended stability
>  Alan> and other useful thing).  What's wrong with it?

>What's wrong with it is that (as last I heard) Linus isn't going to
>allow KGI to go into the kernel.   Hence it would have no hope of
>becoming a replacement for SVGAlib.  

No hope *YET.*

There are two problems with putting KGI into the kernel:

a) It's not robust enough yet, and

b) There is disagreement as to the merit/quality of the architecture.
(Linus thinks that the GGI people are trying to push some dumb things
into the kernel; I prefer to stay out of that fight...)

Both problems are solvable.  In particular, if the GGI coders "build a
mousetrap" that is so good that everyone starts lobbying to have this
*USEFUL CODE* in the kernel, then this is the point at which
disagreement may be (perhaps reluctantly) set aside.

In other words, if it gets really robust and really functional, then b)
may be overcome by GGI's other merits.  It's Not There yet.

The Right Answer may be to also fix whatever is "broken" about the GGI
architecture; no doubt that is malleable enough that there will be some
changes made by the time the overall system starts to get robust enough
to consider moving it into "production" kernels.

--
We are MicroSoft.  You will be assimilated.  Resistance is futile.
(Attributed to B.G., Gill Bates)

 
 
 

New GUI tool for Linux. [idea]

Post by Dominique Voca » Wed, 20 May 1998 04:00:00


Quote:> > The point is that it is simply *too large* for a 386 system with 8MB of
> > RAM to happily run along with any interestingly complex applications.
> > And that is is the sort of "throwaway system of five years ago" that
> > one sees.

> I don't think (nor do you, if i've interpreted your web page correctly) that
> this is a solvable problem.  If you want all the features, you need a
> certain minimum level of hardware.  Fortunately that hardware is fairly
> cheap these days.

still, for those that happily run linux on such a box and which want a decent
graphical suit of apps for vanilla wordprocessing a spreadsheets etc. there is a
small suit that runs well in dos-emu, supports mac-like long filenames, maclike
creator-ID, multithreaded multitasking native faxing, scalable fonts etc... and
runs with about two (2) megs of ram for itself and a 386 nicely...

it is based on that GEOS thing formerly known as GeoWorks and is now called
NewDeal Office. There is soon to come out a new release with a fullfunctional
webbrowser and e-Mail all under the same gui.

http://www.new-deal.com/

sorry for being off-topic...

bye

Dominique

(Happy KDE user... :-)