RE: OT : GUI Interfaces
well don't mind me, i'm just poking at those who know in order to learn
From: Karsten M. Self [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: donderdag 12 april 2001 0:55
Subject: Re: OT : GUI Interfaces
on Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 09:42:30PM +0200, Joris Lambrecht
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karsten M. Self [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: woensdag 11 april 2001 20:31
> To: 'email@example.com'
> Subject: Re: OT : GUI Interfaces
> > on Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 04:20:45PM +0200, Joris Lambrecht
> > (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> > > Does anyone know of a non X GUI interface wich has a number of
> > > applications ported to it ? I keep wondering if X is the answer to
> > > Gui's for linux, it is after all a hefty piece of software to run
> > > ... This question comes from reading up on AtheOS wich uses a
> > > proprietary interface wich is reportedly working very well and
> > > fast ...
> > >
> > > Since X is, after all those years, not the most userfriendly piece
> > > of software i'm looking for something else, if available.
> > X isn't a GUI, it's a network-enabled window management system. And
> > you probably don't grasp its strengths.
> > If you mean "does anyone know of a GUI development toolkit that's
> > not specific to X", the answer becomes: Tcl/Tk and Qt.
> > I suspect, however, that the question has some degree of confusion
> > over its own identity and direction.
> > Cheers.
> Although i must admit to have written a somewhat technically confusing
> mail i thought my point would come across, since i was referring to
Problems with your shift key?
> AtheOS wich does NOT use X to build it's interface. Didn't know that
> did ya ! Should you have known this you wouldn't bother pointing out
> someones apparent ignorance wich seems to be a hobby of yours.
AtheOS, as I've since learned from other sources, is a free clone of
BeOS. I assume its graphics subsystem is similar, though I admit near
total ignorance of BeOS as well.
> Yes, X is a network enabled window managment system wich allows a
> client to run the interface of it's liking and allows remote logins to
> a server over the network and so on wich is very nice for people
> collaborating on projects, you don't believe your eyes the first time
> you see that kind of functionality in action (i didn't), beats M$
> TerminalServer. But name me more than one or even ONE public service
> that uses these 'strengths'.
Most "public" services these days are HTML based. Future directions may
vary, but you're likely to see a variant of tagged content with
rendering at the client side moving forward. The public aspect of the
service has nothing, nada, zero, zilch, to do with the display aspect.
OTOH, I can think of many applications I've used which benefit greatly
from the ability to export all display aspects to a remote display
> It IS a fantastic system, indeed, but it weighs on your computers
You are ignorant of what you speak.
> Also, what's the use for those strenghts i cannot grasp in a
> stand-alone configuration?
As with others, I have few standalone systems. I'm typing currently on
my laptop on an rxvt session served out from my desktop, which might be
in the same room, or around the world.
...speaking of which, how do you access these public services of yours
on your standalone systems?
> But that i did not mention, that's true.
> I apparently understand the potential of X but i don't have to grasp
> it's strenghts since i'm working in a stand-alone environment and do
> not work with this type of environment in a . This still is a public
> mailinglist you know, even dumb people can post a mail :)
Ain't that the truth.
BTW, ignorance is not a crime. I expect people to make mistakes. I'd
prefer them to make lots of them. Very few times each.
> I'm not a developper and thus not interested in Tcl/Tk or Qt to write
> my own Gui, though i would feel tempted if i could. I'm not that a
> talented person. Don't understand how you came up with this.
Then what the hell are you asking about?
X is a display protocol. It has problems, none of which have been
identified by you.
Behavior, policy, and appearance of the display is fully independent of
the subsystem itself. This is where toolkits and the like come it.
You're ignorant of these facts, yet you're advising us on what future
directions for GNU/Linux GUI development. If you're going to inform us,
seek to be informed first.
Karsten M. Self <email@example.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal