Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu!bob From: bob@allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss Subject: X Consortium "success" (was Re: Copywrongs) Message-ID: Date: 21 Aug 89 12:47:20 GMT References: <8908181535.AA08568@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu> <11143@watcgl.waterloo.edu> Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Reply-To: Bob Sutterfield Organization: The Ohio State University Dept of Computer & Information Science Lines: 23 In-reply-to: lindsay@watnext.waterloo.edu's message of 18 Aug 89 18:13:00 GMT In article <11143@watcgl.waterloo.edu> lindsay@watnext.waterloo.edu (Lindsay Patten) writes: Now it seems that there must be something to be learned from the (seeming) success of the X consortium. They somehow manage to produce free software. By what process did that take place? Can it be used more generally? The X Consortium's success is the result of classical FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) marketing-driven bullies, asserting that mediocre technology is a "standard" before it even exists. This is very similar to ISO's attempts to foist inferior networking technology on the world, except that X seems already to have succeeded. Indeed, it has succeeded in the arena at which it is aimed: nontechnical, knee-jerk "standards" followers. Unfortunately, X is now a reality to be dealt with, and every wise product manager must follow along. The X Consortium's "success" is collusion in the purest form, and I would hope that FSF would refrain from such tactics in favor of simply providing a superior product and letting the technically (and morally) superior solution win. Like everyone else, FSF must cooperate with X for now, though hopefully someday soon a superior window system technology will be freed for public use. (Boy, if this doesn't draw heat, I don't know what will! :-)