Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken!decwrl!sgi!shinobu!odin!odin.corp.sgi.com!portuesi From: portuesi@tweezers.esd.sgi.com (Michael Portuesi) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Dog-ugly windows? Message-ID: Date: 23 Jan 90 11:47:17 GMT References: <1990Jan11.063225.28025@i-core.UUCP> <45472@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> Sender: news@odin.SGI.COM Reply-To: portuesi@sgi.com (Michael Portuesi) Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mtn. View, CA Lines: 28 In-reply-to: jac@muslix.llnl.gov's message of 22 Jan 90 21:22:58 GMT >>>>> On 22 Jan 90 21:22:58 GMT, jac@muslix.llnl.gov (James Crotinger) said: james> Hate to get involved in this, but what the heck... pete> Speaking of ugly interfaces, is there any uglier than the Amiga's? Michael> Yes. X is uglier by FAR. james> X specifies *NO* user interface whatsoever. It is up to the window james> manager and the application toolkits to provide the look and feel. yeah, yeah, I know I know. I also know that every single one of the window managers and applications I have seen running under X have been much uglier than the Amiga, twm included. james> I use X11R4 and twm, and I think it is a *MUCH* nicer "looking" interface james> than the Amigas. But this doesn't really belong here... Intuition has a much better interaction model, and doesn't have the quirks of twm. I don't feel at all upset using Intuition over any of the X window managers. --M -- __ Michael Portuesi Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Inc. \/ portuesi@SGI.COM Entry Systems Division -- Engineering "We only know in theory what we are doing" -- Kate Bush