Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 16:01:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pierre Phaneuf <pp AT 55-174 DOT hy DOT cgocable DOT ca>
Reply-To: pierre AT tycho DOT com
To: OpenDOS Mailing List <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: X -- ugh
In-Reply-To: <199705151851.OAA03626@delorie.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970515154729.4441A-100000@55-174.hy.cgocable.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 15 May 1997, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote:

> Frankly, if OpenDOS shipped with anything X, my first
> step in OD installation would be to delete X.  If
> it were an option, I'd skip it in every possible use
> for OD I've seen so far.  Somebody needs to come up
> with a replacement for X, and fast.  It needs to
> be constructed to be fairly easy to emulate Win32.
> X emulation would be good but not vital.  It needs
> to be well-written.  If somebody does it, I think
> Unix will rise again.  If not, I think better
> operating systems will replace it, eventually.
> In the long run, I don't think Microsoft can do it;
> but in the short run, they're making progress.

One of the only reasons I have to run X here is that I author HTML as part
of my job, and have to test it with a graphical browser. Also using GIMP
and XV for image composition. Also the occasionnal RealAudio listening to
TheDJ or something (boy, do I love cable modems!).

I like the client/server concept in X. I think it is wrong to merge
multitasking code into windowing subsystem like MS-Windows does. But I'd
like something that I can look at and not barf. I'd like do be able to do
drag-and-drop in an "of course you can!" manner. Hardware independent
display like the Macintosh, probably using similar to Display PostScript.

Pierre Phaneuf

"The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be
regarded as a criminal offense." - Edsger W. Dijkstra.