Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 09:05:46 -0400 (EDT) From: "Chris A. Triebel" To: "Jonathan E. Brickman" Cc: opendos AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: X -- ugh In-Reply-To: <199705151851.OAA03626@delorie.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk I haven't had the chance to look at this document yet, but I will so that I could possibly argue my own case properly. I would like to note that I would use X over win?? in any of its versions. The reason is simple, it is not about efficiency. It is two things, one I like the options. I like that focus follows my mouse, and that everything else is not put on hold while working in one window, and that one a window has focus it doesn't have to be on top of the desktop in full view. If I don't pull it forward I don't want it forward. The other thing is the lack of clutter on my desktop. It just throws up icons and windows. NO MENU BARS. If I want a menu I right click and that is fully configurable. So that is my reason for choosing X over win95. I wan't assure everyone out there, that this is MY CHOICE, not a logical or chest thumping explanation of why X is better than win95. Although one advantage is that X is another program, not a part of the OS itself, and if they do make it so I will avoid that like the plague. The only X that I have seen which is part of the OS ( or seems to be ) is IRIX on the SGI's. NOTE: I hate fvwm-95 which is supposed to simulate the win95 enviroment in X, nasty looking creature. Anyway, those are my comments. cat On Thu, 15 May 1997, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote: > Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 13:42:03 -0500 > From: Jonathan E. Brickman > To: opendos AT delorie DOT com > Subject: X -- ugh > > > To all those thinking about X on OpenDOS, *PLEASE* go to > > http://ecco.bsee.swin.edu.au/unix/uh/x-windows.html and read it ALL. If at > > the end of this you're still in the mood to have X in OpenDOS, take 2 > > aspirins and go to bed. You can call in sick for work. > > I agree with everything this document said, having tried > most of it at least once. In my opinion, one reason > Unix is on the decline is the despicable nature > of X-Windows. I find it rather humorous that people > who hate Windows and love Unix are even willing to > say anything about X-Windows. There are reasons > few programs are ported from Windows to X, and > most of those are in that document. > > 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. > > Jonathan E. Brickman River City Computing, Inc. (913) 232-6663 > http://www.cjnetworks.com/~rivercity brickman AT cjnetworks DOT com > It seems to me that men usually think more about carburetors, and women > think more about doors. I think the world needs really good carburetors...and > really good doors.