Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ginosko!usc!apple!sun-barr!texsun!playroom!pitstop!neff
From: neff@pitstop.West.Sun.COM (Mike Neff)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: What is that MOTIF thang on expo?!?
Message-ID: <825@pitstop.West.Sun.COM>
Date: 24 Aug 89 06:04:16 GMT
References: <8908171153.AA02417@fnord.umiacs.UMD.EDU> <1444@riscy.dec.com> <1445@riscy.dec.com> <538@ssbell.UUCP>
Reply-To: neff@pitstop.UUCP (Mike Neff)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc., Mountain View, CA.
Lines: 89

In article <538@ssbell.UUCP> kent@ssbell.UUCP (Kent Landfield) writes:
>In article <1445@riscy.dec.com> graham@fuel.dec.com (kris graham) writes:
>>
>>>Actually (as someone who is definitely more of an OSF fan than a Unix
>>>International fan), I worry that, simply because the OPEN LOOK-compliant
>>>X11 toolkit (and maybe a window manager, I don't know for sure) *is*
>>>distributed for free, OPEN LOOK will win over Motif.
>>
>>Some scientific surveys have been done ...regarding the OPEN LOOK vs Motif
>>controversy.... So far, Motif has a wide margin lead.  A good example of
>>such survey, is the one conducted by UNIX Today! in July ' 89.
>
>Scientific surveys ? BULL. The article that you direct the readers to states 
>it is an informal survey. If you know of *real* scientific surveys, I'd be
>happy    ^^^^^^^^
>read them. Please post locatable references to them in this newsgroup as
>I am sure there are others who are interested as well...

Another thing for people to consider when reading stuff like this in the trade
rags is that a poll like this is what companies want to *publicly* state.
What they in fact really do often times is very different.than what their
stated plans are or is in fact not talked about at all.  This poll is *not*
a scientific analysis, as both UNIX Today and Kent point out.

I'm not saying that the poll is necessarily inaccurate but let me point out
where it could be flawed.

Consider the amount of current Sunview applications in the marketplace
and compare that with the amount of window-based applications made for
other Unix platforms.  Many software vendors might not want to lose sales
of current product by "preannouncing" their future product plans to commit
to OPEN LOOK since many are heavily dependent on revenue from the large
Sun user base.

Alternatively, in many situations announcing support for Motif might be
helpful in getting sales on platforms such as the new DECstation, DG and a
few others who've endorsed Motif but don't necessarily use it solely
( i.e. - DECWindows, New Wave, NeXTstep ).  This is likely since there aren't
many existing window-based applications available for these platforms at
present ( for any number of reasons ... current market share, newness of
binary format, previous bent towards time-shared tty environments, etc. )
and therefore the ISV can gain more new markets on these platforms instead
of lose sales of current product.

To summarize it's my *opinion* that given the current state of the industry,
it is more advantageous in general for an ISV to publicly state its plans
towards Motif support than OPEN LOOK support. This is why I believe the
polls you mentioned showed quite a few in the "undecided" (50%) column.
Many may in fact fit in to the undecided category, but many may not be
wanting to take a public position even though privately they may have already
committed themselves.  The real story will unfold with time.

>
>>Making something 'free' does not necessarily make it more popular.  There
>>are other reasons why users may pick one UI over the other.
>
>Technical merit, ease of use, flexibility and extensibility come to mind as
>well as reliability.  Before you go sounding like the marketing department,
>maybe you should get some real info on OPEN LOOK from the people it was 
>designed for, the masses. All the articles that I have seen to date have
>been surveying people with a great deal of computer literacy. The real test
>of a GUI is to see just how easy it is for computer illiterates to learn
>and use the machine. 
>

I won't comment on this, since this is a somewhat subjective issue and I
don't want to get involved in a "my interface is better than yours" flame
war.  I personally have more experience using OPEN LOOK than Motif so I'll
admit my bias.  I think it should be up to users and developers like Kent to
make these kind of judgements.  I only hope that whatever "standard" gets
adopted is what end users *and* developers want after being well-informed of
what each toolkit/interface implementation has to offer in the areas which
Kent talks about. Additionally, I hope that the press helps communicate this
feedback accurately and more in depth to aid this decision process.

I too would like to see some real "scientific" studies posted.

>>Christopher Graham          
>>Digital Equipment Corp            
>>Ultrix Resource Center                      
>
>			-Kent+

Mike Neff
Systems Engineer
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

The above material represents my opinions only and doesn't neccessarily
represent the position of my employers.