rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Bob Scheifler) (02/04/89)
> ... One reaction to this in the Xt world has been the design > (from DEC) of "gadgets" (windowless widgets). ... ^^^^^^^^^ --Ahem-- We have done gadgets also. Yes, surely. I was attempting to refer to the more generic aspects of the gadget design (which DEC did first), not the particular aspects of whether gadgets have full or partial resources, or whether or not all composites support gadgets. Credit where credit is due (which is not to say that HP doesn't deserve some).
ben@hpcvlx.HP.COM (Benjamin Ellsworth) (02/07/89)
> Yes, surely. I was attempting to refer to the more generic aspects > of the gadget design (which DEC did first)... "First" is an interesting concept, but of little or no meaning in our industry when the difference between first and second is only a few months. If you wish to assert that DEC was first, I am willing to plead "no contest" in order to avoid this debate turning into a round of one-upmanship (can you say "piss fight?"). > ... not the particular aspects of whether gadgets have full or partial > resources, or whether or not all composites support gadgets. I designed and wrote a good deal of the HP gadgets (although I must admit another engineer was heading that project), I have the DEC code in front of me. The differences in design and implementation between HP and DEC are a good deal more involved than you allude. However, in a minimalist sense, a "windowless widget" is a "windowless widget" ("parts is parts?" ;-). > Credit where credit is due (which is not to say that HP doesn't > deserve some). Agreed. I in no way wish to depreciate the gadgets that DEC did. They address the need in an effective manner. An interestig debate (although impossible in a public forum due to the confidentiality of the information) could ensue over which implementation is "better." I'm sure that OSF had such a debate, and right or wrong, their decision was in favor of the HP design. I mentioned OSF not to smear of DEC, but rather to establish some credibility of our design (you, and your messages, provide DEC's credibility). To restate, DEC has working gadgets, DEC may even have had them a few months ahead of HP. I feel to dispute none of this. It is the idea that DEC has pre-eminence in gadget technology that I take issue with. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Benjamin Ellsworth | ben%hp-pcd@hp-sde.sde.hp.com | INTERNET Hewlett-Packard Company | {backbone}!hplabs!hp-pcd!ben | UUCP 1000 N.E. Circle | (USA) (503) 750-4980 | FAX Corvallis, OR 97330 | (USA) (503) 757-2000 | VOICE ----------------------------------------------------------------------- All relevant disclaimers apply. -----------------------------------------------------------------------