Path: utzoo!attcan!lsuc!sq!news
From: news@sq.sq.com
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Sun's OPENLOOK vs AT&T's OPENLOOK
Message-ID: <1989Jun13.190107.29502@sq.sq.com>
Date: 13 Jun 89 19:01:07 GMT
References: <2899@cuuxb.ATT.COM>
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto
Lines: 25

>We're depressed.  After spending much time deciding upon a user interface
>for our project and finally deciding to use X with an OPENLOOK look and feel
>we find much to our chagrin that there are two implementation's of OPENLOOK
>toolkits -- Sun's and AT&T's...

On the contrary, we are pleased. For the first time there are toolkits
that support a variety of (well, two) quite different programming
paradigms, and that will together allow the conversion of large
numbers of existing programs (both Xt-based and SunView-based)
to use THE EXACT SAME (they say) USER INTERFACE. How could anybody
get depressed by THAT? The users win because of consistency, and
vendors who have used either type of toolkit win because one of
these two toolkits will let them run with OPENLOOK.

As for which toolkit to choose, well, it depends on a variety
of factors. You mention portability: well, Sun has stated openly
that the source for their XView toolkit will be donated (royalty-free) to
the X Consortium for XV11R4, so if you're willing to do the work,
you can take that toolkit with you to *any* working XV11 machine
that you want to port your application on.

Does this help you decide?

Ian Darwin
SoftQuad Inc.