Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!dptechno!dave
From: dave@dptechno.UUCP (Dave Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: VOM Look
Message-ID: <547@dptechno.UUCP>
Date: 30 Jul 90 20:59:49 GMT
References: <9007271840.AA15107@milton.u.washington.edu>
Reply-To: dave@dptechno.UUCP (Dave Lee)
Organization: D.P. Technology Corp. Camarillo California
Lines: 28

In article <9007271840.AA15107@milton.u.washington.edu> donn@MILTON.U.WASHINGTON.EDU (Donn Cave) writes:
>
>Does beautiful graphic design depend on fake 3-D ornamentation?  I hope
>not!  But whatever esthetic principles inspire our would-be graphic designers,
>I hope they will also consider screen "real estate" as a resource.  Most of
>the window managers I've seen want to add considerably to the size of a window,
>forcing me to overlap windows that could otherwise be adjacent.  Twm, to its
>credit, allows me to control the size of these decorations.  Window managers
>from the "look fascism" camps aren't generally so flexible.

On a similar note, Most "smart" window managers and indeed most of the 
contrib software seems (IMHO) to be written with a large screen in mind.
Typically 1152x900 or atleast 1024x768. 

Try these wm's on a VGA at 640x480 and you have real problems of the 
above mentioned type. 

I'm of the "roll-your-own" camp.  I use uwm exclusivly.  Program in 
Xlib only.  Have my own X libraries that use my own quick minimal 3D 
effect.  And, Yes, it does look much better than the 2D effect.  
Amazing what just 8 XDraw()'s can do for appeal, WITHOUT much 
noticable overhead in either response time OR library size.

 

-- 
Dave Lee
uunet!dptechno!dave