Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 16:52:00 -0800 From: gummibear@we.mediaone.net To: newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Unix Desktop Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19981224165200.006998c8@we.mediaone.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.981224153604.6994A-100000@crl.crl.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19981224133345.006990d4@we.mediaone.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:55 PM 12/24/98 -0800, Ben Manes wrote: > >> Lately, I have basically evaluating the X Windows system, and I just can't >> figure out why it hasn't been made any easier for average users. I can't >> figure out why antialiased fonts (such as true type fonts) haven't been >> made the standard. I can't figure out why there hasn't been a solution to >> the problem of not having a standardized Interface (or a few standardized >> interfaces to choose from when developing applications or whatever - choice >> isn't a bad thing). I can't figure out why the standard X libraries and >> widget set hasn't been given the 90's look and feel (ala qt libraries). > >I'd guess that all of that can't be standardized because UNIX is a mob of >different standards. If some group says here's the standard, do you >really expect Sun, HP, SCO, DEC, BSDs, Linux(es), etc. to all just jump >in and embrace it? The momentum behind Linux is against standardizing, >because to many that's what they conceve windows to be. Once you >standardize, you reduce choice, power, and expandability for greater >functionality. UNIX is slowly evolving in functionality.. but it has a >ways to go and I'd rather developers find ways to make it more user >friendly so any desktop enviroment can be used, but all efficently. Its >harder, but doesn't hinder progress (ie. windows is built on dos to >provide functionality, and therefor both 9x and NT (which has to be >compatable with 9x) are hindered). > >> Well actually that's one reason I don't get rid of windows. She also likes >> AOL Instant Messager so she can keep in contact with her family. The tcl >> version seems to need some work. I don't know anything about the java >> version to evaluate it. > >Tell her to switch to ICQ. Aol bought them, and will likely replace >instant messanger sooner or later. Also, ICQ is working on a X-windows >version (a friend is on a command-line version), so watch for it... ICQ >also has more features.. > But then practically her whole family will have to switch to ICQ right? I mean, ICQ and Instant Messanger are totally different things right? >> I'm just wondering is there an alternative to X Windows? Has another > >I think X Windows is just an artifical name for the UNIX guis. Solaris >and BSD have different programming for their GUIs, but there both X and >run ontop of the UNIX kernals. Solaris has the OpenWindows thing right? > >> I have also been wondering if a java based window manager can be created > >Java is slow, and since X windows is meant as for the person siting at >the workstation, its pointless writing it (or a windows manager) in a >language meant for streamlining the data through a network. C++ is far >faster and so it makes more sense.. and picoJava (a Sun java accelerator >chip) was killed and may one day be integrated into systems, but those >are set-top boxes, handhelds, etc. I see. I just thought that maybe it would be easier to write in java because it comes with widgets and stuff. Although, couldn't java be comipiled in a way that it runs natively on say an Intel achitecture? > >Oh, and about being hating christmass.. I know the feeling.. > heheh Christmas....Bah...Humbug! Joey -- The Grinch To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.1.32.19981224165200.006998c8>