tony@cs.tamu.edu (Tony Encarnacion) (03/06/91)
Has anybody used GeoWorks Ensemble, another window manager for PCs? How does it compare to Windows 3.0? From the GeoWorks brochure, they claim that it can run on just 512K on an XT and has Motif-compliant interface. It comes with a text processor, a drawing program, etc. but I did not see mention of program development.
ken@point.ne1300.ingr.com (Ken Poore) (03/06/91)
tony@cs.tamu.edu (Tony Encarnacion) writes: >Has anybody used GeoWorks Ensemble, another window manager for PCs? >How does it compare to Windows 3.0? >From the GeoWorks brochure, they claim that it can run on just 512K >on an XT and has Motif-compliant interface. It comes with a text >processor, a drawing program, etc. but I did not see mention of >program development. I have a copy of it here in my office, and for a novice computer user, it is *far* better than Windows 3.0 (I also have a copy of Windows). A friend of mine has been contacted as a possible developer for a database engine for Geoworks, so you can expect a decent DB interface soon. I like Windows, too, but it is hell to set up and configure properly, especially for the novice. I say this because of the troubles I've had (I've been using PC's for 8 years), and complaints I regularly see in trade journals. Sure, Windows has tons more applications going for it, and there are several development toolkits available, but for a new user, GeoWorks has all the right tools. It's great for a portable, except that it *must* have a mouse; and won't install until you have one. Geoworks sports an excellent rolodex, a decent calendar (kinda like Alamanac, but not quite as good), nice file manager, adequate communications software, a pretty good word processor (no search and replace, who cares!?), and a very good draw program with very good scalable fonts. One thing Windows has going for it is the ability to run non-Windows apps in Window's windows. Geoworks can only 'shell' out and run them. Again, this is fine for about 80% of the users (again, thinking novice). Someone posted a while ago that it blew away his hard disk, but I haven't seen it happen in the 5 installs I've witnessed. Right now (as of about 6 weeks ago) GeoWorks did not have a commercial developer's library available, but it was promised real soon, now. All in all, it's an excellent first release. It's not a Windows clone, by any means; you can tell this by the minimum resources required. If it catches on at all, I think it'll be a serious contender. In my opinion, it's what Windows should have been. -- |Ken Poore |TIM Appl. Specialist, Intergraph Corporation | |poore@ingr.com forwarded to | Region V Technical Services | |ne1300!point!ken | Reston, Virginia | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6600prao@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Parik Rao) (03/07/91)
I too use GeoWorks but for one application only; America Online. It only comes with the most rudimentary of programs (notepad, a mini word processor, solitaire, a small database, a mini comm program, and so forth). They claim a large list of developers in the wings, but I'm not holding my breath. You should be able to get a development kit for a good price right about now, or within weeks at the latest. It does multitask GEOS apps, but no DOS apps (as the previous poster said, you shell out to dos and GEOS is shut down until you return - giving a few seconds delay from the dos EXIT command). It works fine on all IBMs, supports all rez's (including 800x600 svga), and is very nice looking. There are some minor nits I have with its interface, but things like tear-off menus and bold menu outlines are quite nice. Remember, you'll be buying it for the interface and not much more at the moment. There is no word for GEOS, no Lotus-1-2-3 GEOS. I dunno if its worth getting Geos or waiting until DOS 5.0's (lame)shell is released... -- Parik Rao, University of California Santa Barbara 6600prao@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu
aaron@jessica.stanford.edu (Aaron Wallace) (03/07/91)
In article <2600@ne3005.ingr.com> ken@point.ne1300.ingr.com (Ken Poore) writes: >tony@cs.tamu.edu (Tony Encarnacion) writes: > >All in all, it's an excellent first release. It's not a Windows clone, by >any means; you can tell this by the minimum resources required. If it >catches on at all, I think it'll be a serious contender. In my opinion, it's >what Windows should have been. One question (I know nothing about GeoWorks other than hype)--will it be able to run in protected mode someday? The original Windows was delayed because the memory manager was rewritten to be protected-mode API comatible; the payoff is that the move from 2.xx to 3.0 wasn't too painful and now globally allocating 800K of memory is quite easy. I'd say if GeoWorks programs have to be rewritten to go protected, the system is doomed to the 640K graveyard... Aaron Wallace
pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744) (03/10/91)
In article <13085@helios.TAMU.EDU>, tony@cs.tamu.edu (Tony Encarnacion) writes... >Has anybody used GeoWorks Ensemble, another window manager for PCs? >How does it compare to Windows 3.0? > >From the GeoWorks brochure, they claim that it can run on just 512K >on an XT and has Motif-compliant interface. It comes with a text >processor, a drawing program, etc. but I did not see mention of >program development. I had a chance to play with Geos on a 286 machine for several hours. I was impressed at the speed of the thing, but I really missed some standard features such as a spell check for the Word Processor. The screen and printer fonts are breathtaking (I printed a 400 point letter on a Panasonic 9-pin: came out without any jaggies, yet took about 5 minutes to print. The menus can be taken off the menu bar and placed anywhere on the screen, reminding me of the NEXT environment, yet the screen resolution is limited to VGA, not leaving enough space to work in anyway. In the filemanager files appear as icons just like on a MAC, and one can select by dragging over groups. It even has a garbage can in the corner (how did they avoid a lawsuit?). About program development: I heard the entire environment and the applications have been written in assembler! No wonder there is not much happening in terms of Geos add-ons. The look of the package is a little playful (just about everything is done in 3-D style, with lots of color and wallpaper.), but since it is mainly designed for a low-end (home?) market, this design is probably appropriate. The best feature overall is the font support on screen and low-end printers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PBURKE@VMS.MACC.WISC.EDU (608) 263-7744 MICRO INFORMATION CENTER 1210 W. DAYTON ST. MADISON, WI 53706 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
eshenk@intuit.intuit.COM (Eric Shenk) (03/15/91)
tony@cs.tamu.edu (Tony Encarnacion) writes: >Has anybody used GeoWorks Ensemble, another window manager for PCs? >How does it compare to Windows 3.0? >From the GeoWorks brochure, they claim that it can run on just 512K >on an XT and has Motif-compliant interface. It comes with a text >processor, a drawing program, etc. but I did not see mention of >program development I have only seen demos and played around with it, so I can't give you a user's viewpoint. However, from what I've seen and read, I can only say that the guys at GeoWorks are absolutely brilliant! This is what early versions of Windows should have looked like. In *everything* that they have implemented, they make Windows look like a dinosaur. It runs in next to no memory at all (the Kernel was designed to use ~70K. No, I didn't leave out any digits, I really meant 70K). Inspite of the fact that they use outline font technology and run everything through graphics device drivers, it is blazing fast. On my machine, it displays a *full page* n less than a second. This is outline fonts displayable at arbi- trary point sizes (like 10 1/8) in a variety of colors and styles. Granted I have a 486, but I've seen it on slow 286 machines and the speed is very acceptable. This stuff looks *really* good. It is the first time I've ever had Mac users be jealous of how my DOS machine looks (seriously). The outline fonts and NExT-like windows and icons make it very sharp. Other tidbits of interest to programming types: It supports true-premeptive multitasking (including multiple threads of execution within one process), dynamic memory management, arbitrary window shapes, and uses MS-DOS files access for compatiability. Oh yeah, another really cool thing: they are going to release a version (if they haven't already) that allows you to switch between Motif, Open Look and CUA/Presentation manager interfaces whenever you want, and all of your apps still work. [having completed the world's largest run-on paragraph, I pause to breathe] So how do they do it? They write everything in an object oriented assembler of their own development. Unfortunately, it only works as a cross compiler running on Sun 386i's. The company is more than happy to have you develop stuff for GeoWorks but you'll have to do it on Sunn's in their language. Bummer. However, they are planning on brining the development evironment down to the real world. Just a final note: I thought "Ah, assembler hackers. No wonder it's so tight and fast. The code for it must really be a mess." Not so! Their internal design is equally as brilliant as their external design (I have the developer's overview). Everything is beautifully layered and seperated and abstracted just like the profs always said it should be. It's all object oriented, libraried, drivered, and kerneled. The system abstracts out the UI from the data and does it in such a way that's it's supposedly easy to code in a UI-independant fashion (remember that the user can switch UI's at the flick of a button!). Did I mention that I think these guys are stunningly brilliant? :) -eric PS, If these guys go under and Microsoft succeeds, it will definitely prove that there is no justice in the world and that good money matters a heck of a lot more than good product. PPS, I should mention that Windows has a lot more than this, like object linking and so on. But in all of the basics, Geoworks is VASTLY superior.
tedb@hpcvra.cv.hp.com. (Ted Beers) (03/16/91)
> Just a final note: I thought "Ah, assembler hackers. No wonder it's so > tight and fast. The code for it must really be a mess." Not so! Their > internal design is equally as brilliant as their external design (I have > the developer's overview). Everything is beautifully layered and seperated > and abstracted just like the profs always said it should be. It's all > object oriented, libraried, drivered, and kerneled. The system abstracts > out the UI from the data and does it in such a way that's it's supposedly > easy to code in a UI-independant fashion (remember that the user can switch > UI's at the flick of a button!). Sounds good! So where can the rest of us get GeoWorks Ensemble and the developer's overview you mention? Ted W. Beers Hewlett-Packard
mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) (03/18/91)
In article <399@intuit.intuit.COM> eshenk@intuit.intuit.COM (Eric Shenk) writes: >So how do they do it? They write everything in an object oriented assembler >of their own development. Unfortunately, it only works as a cross compiler >running on Sun 386i's. The company is more than happy to have you develop >stuff for GeoWorks but you'll have to do it on Sunn's in their language. >Bummer. However, they are planning on brining the development evironment >down to the real world. Last I heard, a SDK was at the very top of Berkeley Softworks' list of priorities. By the way, the reason that Geoworks is such a nice, compact environment is that the BSW folk learned their trade on Commodore 64's. If you can write a responsive windowing interface with all the usual amenities on a 2MHz 8-bit machine, you can certainly do it on better hardware. And if the Commodore SDK is any indication, the PC SDK should be a pleasant, productive assembly environment. Marc R. Roussel mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca
tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) (03/18/91)
Eric Shenk <eshenk@intuit.intuit.COM> writes: > I have only seen demos and played around with it, so I can't give you > a user's viewpoint. However, from what I've seen and read, I can only > say that the guys at GeoWorks are absolutely brilliant! [...] > PS, If these guys go under and Microsoft succeeds, it will definitely prove > that there is no justice in the world and that good money matters a heck of > a lot more than good product. Sure, GeoWorks is slick and fast and beautiful, but where was it in 1985 when Windows first came on the market? Weren't these guys brilliant back then yet? Microsoft has slowly built up development tools, applications and momentum for Windows, so that 6 years later we have a fairly comprehen- sive environment with lots of tools and apps. Really, if you take into account the changes in software technology and so on, Geoworks isn't really much more advanced (relatively speaking) than Windows 1.0 was in its day. There is no spreadsheet, and almost no other apps, and not even an SDK (Windows had one back then even). And Geoworks does not take advantage of the fact that almost all new machines have over a megabyte of memory installed. These guys have been able to draw on the experience of Windows, Mac, GEM, Motif, X, Amiga, and all others --- the waters are much better charted now than when Microsoft first shipped Win1. And given that MS-DOS is so brain-damaged, and it'd be so easy to write a better single-tasking OS for the PC, why didn't anyone else do it back in '80 or so? Could it be that it's always easier to do something well once it's already been done by someone else? Geoworks is well done, but a Windows 3.0 it ain't. [ \tom haapanen --- university of waterloo --- tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu ] [ "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
mmshah@athena.mit.edu (Milan M Shah) (03/18/91)
OK, is the Geoworks Ensemble limited to DOS/640K? Or can it take advantage of 386 protect mode and provide virtual memory and multitask plain DOS apps in their own virtual '86 environment? Milan .
mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) (03/18/91)
In article <1991Mar17.194447.2756@watserv1.waterloo.edu> tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) writes: >Sure, GeoWorks is slick and fast and beautiful, but where was it in 1985 >when Windows first came on the market? Weren't these guys brilliant back >then yet? Yes, they were. Back in 1985, Berkeley Softworks was busy selling a new windowing OS for Commodore 8-bit machines. >Really, if you take into account the changes in software technology and so >on, Geoworks isn't really much more advanced (relatively speaking) than >Windows 1.0 was in its day. There is no spreadsheet, and almost no other >apps, and not even an SDK (Windows had one back then even). The SDK is on the way. As to applications, I'm sure someone else will provide them once the SDK is out. >And Geoworks >does not take advantage of the fact that almost all new machines have over >a megabyte of memory installed. You're missing the point. GeoWorks isn't supposed to compete with Windows on the more powerful machines, it's supposed to blow away Windows on the less well-endowed models. Have you tried running Windows on an XT? Sincerely, Marc R. Roussel mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca
tporczyk@na.excelan.com (Tony Porczyk) (03/19/91)
The News Manager) Nntp-Posting-Host: na Organization: Standard Disclaimer References: <13085@helios.TAMU.EDU> <399@intuit.intuit.COM> <1991Mar18.031321.26035@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1991 05:45:39 GMT In article <1991Mar18.031321.26035@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>, mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) writes: > You're missing the point. GeoWorks isn't supposed to compete with > Windows on the more powerful machines, it's supposed to blow away > Windows on the less well-endowed models. Have you tried running Windows > on an XT? Blow away on an XT? You can't blow a bubble-gum on an XT... :) Frankly, I am afraid if they want to build a future on an XT, I am not going to buy their shares... Running Windows on an XT? Is that a latest trend in S/M? :) Tony
reichard@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Kevin Reichard) (03/20/91)
mmshah@athena.mit.edu (Milan M Shah) writes: >OK, is the Geoworks Ensemble limited to DOS/640K? Or can it take advantage >of 386 protect mode and provide virtual memory and multitask plain DOS apps >in their own virtual '86 environment? > >Milan >. No. PC/GEOS cannot multitask plain DOS apps in their own 86 environment. --K. UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, crash}!orbit!pnet51!reichard ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!reichard@nosc.mil INET: reichard@pnet51.orb.mn.org
eshenk@intuit.intuit.COM (Eric Shenk) (03/21/91)
Based on several responses I've have gotten to my original message (largely a glowing summary of Geos delivered from a soap box) I feel the need to expand a little on what I said. Geos (the os made by GeoWorks, the company--sorry for any confusion I may have caused) is indeed a "young" environment. As such, there are many things it lacks that more mature environments have (as I tried to mention earlier, albeit poorly). What makes these guys brilliant IMHO is not that they have come up with amazing breakthroughs in the area of GUIs. They have built on the work of Microsoft and others, who in turn all built on the work of those photocopier guys (how quickly we forget who came up with the ideas and who is just refining...). I believe their brilliance is in the area of implementation. Their code is incredibly small and very fast, yet the final product looks *really* sharp, and their internal interface is better layered and organized than any I've yet seen. In summary, it is an emerging environment that does not (yet) have all of the features of the mature environments, but what it does have is implemented much more efficiently and cleanly (both UI and API). They claim not to overlap with Microsoft since MS is aimed at 386 and up machines, while they run nicely on low-end machines. But if they succeed there, it's not hard to envision them working their way up. As to where Ensemble can be found try a software store; I know Egghead has it and I've seen it elsewhere. For developers info, I would try calling headquarters at (415) 644-0883. I would imagine that once you've waded your way through the evil phone maze and finally wind up talking to a person, someone ought to be able to help you. -eric PS, According to their system overview, memory management is based on the conventional 640K DOS model, with any memory above that being used as swap space. However, they do have a blurb that says "memory management routines...are extensible to handle linear address spaces without requiring modification of existing applications."
calloway@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Frank Calloway) (03/22/91)
I recently received the demo version of Geoworks Ensemble. After using it a bit, I'd describe it as "Windows Jr." The applications that come with it are okay but, generally speaking, poorer than those supplied with Windows. For example, Ensemble's "toy" word processor doesn't have search and replace (thus, by my definition, it isn't even a word processor). If Geoworks can get developers to write applications for Ensemble, it could be a viable product for low-end hardware. My criticism is in no way intended to detract from what the folks at Geoworks have done. But I'll stick with Windows 3.0 on my 386 machines. Frank Calloway