Re: [TCLUG:3372] UI (was: Windows NT pricing)

[Christopher Palmer <reid@pconline.com>]

On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, Mark Dalton wrote:

> I would not say X is nearly as much of a problem as Christopher thinks,

For starters, the kind of consistency that Richard mentioned, and that
real UIs take for granted, should be implemented within X itself. Also,
its network performance leaves something to be desired (VNC and Timbuktu
can work over a 28.8 modem for chrissakes!). Repeat after me:

m e m o r y   h o g

n o n - e x i s t e n t   U I   c o n s i s t e n c y

s h i t t y   f o n t   r e n d e r i n g

Yes, it's all we have right now, but I come from Macintosh Land, and I
hate seeing the worse software win (Mac OS (the non-UI parts), Windows, X
Windows). Unix proper is so good -- what went wrong with X?

> the others really are not a alternative until they have all of the
> applications.

Again, though, X is lacking in applications, as well -- at least
compared to the real UIs (including CLI). So there's not a monumental loss
that has to be swallowed if a switch is made to one of the alternative
graphics systems.

>     Berlin:
> 	http://www.berlin-consortium.org/

Forgive my typo in the previous post. :)

_____________________________________________________________________________
Christopher Reid Palmer : reid@pconline.com : www.pconline.com/~reid/