monty@sagpd1.UUCP (Monty Saine) (10/19/89)
In article <582@zip.eecs.umich.edu> bagchi@sparky.eecs.umich.edu.UUCP (Ranjan Bagchi) writes: >In article <284@tcville.HAC.COM> allen@tcville.hac.com (Allen Farrington) writes: >>Ya know, the primary Mac archiver, Stuffit (now a commercial >>product), is a really slick program. You just dclick on the >>archive's icon and you're presented with a listing of the >>available files. Select the ones you want and it'll undo >>them in a jiffy. >> >>I don't see why some industrious person couldn't take the zoo >>source (it's PD isn't it?) and add a slick user interface >>to it. Any takers? > >Gack. No...a thousand screams no... Graphic-type interfaces are nice, >without a doubt for an infrequently used program, that does a lot >of stuff that needs complex settings. Gack yourself.....There is nothing wrong with a graphic interface that uses a good file requestor. Not all of us are avid CLI users. It is attitudes like this that prevent a wider base of users from adopting the AMIGA. One of the powers of the AMIGA is the fact that you have a choice of CLI or workbench. I for one do considerable work via a program called Umast and only open a CLI if there is no other way. Don't ever start to think that your way is the only way, after all the AMIGA is the computer for the creative mind! Monty Saine
new@udel.edu (Darren New) (10/20/89)
Of course, the best way to work this would be to have a graphical front-end to ZOO which would simply call Execute() to do the real zooing. Why does it need to be incompatible? -- Darren