c60c-3cf@web-3a.berkeley.edu (Dan Kogai) (05/03/90)
In article <1990May1.163331.625@smsc.sony.com> dce@Sony.COM (David Elliott) writes: >Actually, this topic gets attention every 3 weeks, when someone who >ought to know better uses the meaningless term "true multitasking". >In general, what people are asking for is a better way to handle >program crashes, no matter how it works. Thanks for speaking it out to us. I ought to have said the same thing. In that respect UNIX is far better an OS--Core dump is better than Bomb Alert or Macsbug screen which so often fails to "es" or "ea". >This is not a property of X, but a property of the window manager you >are using. The Motif window manager allows both click-to-type (like >the Mac) and focus-follows-pointer (like other X window managers). As >far as knowing what happens to each mouse click, that's a property of >the applications. Most Mac applications are nice enough to let you >know that something has happened. X applications can do this, but >since many applications are still written without standard widgets that >do this, there's no consistency. Window Manager is exactly like INITs/CDEVs for Macs: Convenient and troublesome. Since Window Manager screens out some of precious event queues, some application is imcompatible with Window Manager (Just like wrongly configured Quickey!). Another Obnoxious property of Window Manager is it's configured via text! No "Configure..." Menu item that pops up dialog to configure itself (Well, it's quite flexible, tho). My .twmrc is above 25k! Who said X window is GUI? >In my case, I have no problem switching between the two. I started >with X, but the Mac model works just as well for me. They are very >different ways of accomplishing the same goals. I like both but if I had to make a choice between the 2, I won't take a single clock circle of IIfx to choose a Mac--no matter what X is still too slow! And it takes obnoxious command line to set attributes and xrdb format is even more obnoxious. X needs hell lot of KISS! >As far as idraw goes, it's simply an application you have available to >you (for a lot less than MacDraw costs, mind you). There are much >nicer drawing programs available under X, such as xfig and tgif. Also, >if you want to pay for it, FrameMaker has a drawing environment. I never thought xfig is nice. X has terrible nature of implementing graphics in text. I almost threw up when I took a look at xbm format which all bitmap is converted to C structure! X is too text oriented (Or unix in general). It needs more care for binary files. >X is still a baby. As a result, the Mac folks have a chance to stay >ahead or to merge with X to create a superior interface. If no attempt >is made one way or the other, the Mac will eventually be surpassed by >other interfaces. Sometimes I'm in doubt if X folks are really trying to beat MacOS and make Xwindow tomorrow's GUI. X is as old as a Mac and more programmers are involved and more powerful hardware is assgined. But it's getting more and more obnoxious every update. While Mac has become an attractive girl X is still a crybaby whose size is twice as big as Miss Mac. X/OPEN and Motif are split, still heavily text dependent, still weak event driving (see it freezes like hell), and more. I agree with you that Mac will be out of throne of King of GUI someday but I'd rather bet for NextStep than X who will establish next dynasty of GUI... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ################## Dan The "Dosphobia but Unixphilia" Man + ____ __ __ + (Aka Dan Kogai) + ||__||__| + E-mail: dankg@ocf.berkeley.edu + ____| ______ + Voice: 415-549-6111 + | |__|__| + USnail: 1730 Laloma Berkeley, CA 94709 + |___ |__|__| + U.S.A + |____|____ + + \_| | + #define circular(x) reference(x) + <- THE MAN -> + #define reference(x) circular(x) ################## printf("%s\n", circular(reference("All I say is false"))); -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
s881@cs.utexas.edu (Dan Connolly) (05/03/90)
In article <1990May2.214126.18304@agate.berkeley.edu> c60c-3cf@web-3a.berkeley.edu (Dan Kogai) writes: >In article <1990May1.163331.625@smsc.sony.com> dce@Sony.COM (David Elliott) writes: >>In my case, I have no problem switching between the two. I started >>with X, but the Mac model works just as well for me. They are very >>different ways of accomplishing the same goals. > > I like both but if I had to make a choice between the 2, I won't take >a single clock circle of IIfx to choose a Mac--no matter what X is still >too slow! And it takes obnoxious command line to set attributes and >xrdb format is even more obnoxious. X needs hell lot of KISS! > Oh Nooooooooo! I thought I could post my 2 cents worth without bashing, but now I've started an X-vs-Mac thread. I'll just say that given the state of Mac software before Multifinder, I'm pleased with Apple's multi-tasking offering. Originally I thought it was useless, but now that I have enough memory and some good software, I find it very useful. I'm outa here before I create another monster. (did I at least spell everything right this time?) Dan