Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!anusf.anu.edu.au!drw900 From: drw900@anusf.anu.edu.au ("Drew R Whitehouse") Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi Subject: Re: SGI's migration to X Message-ID: <1990Aug31.093607@anusf.anu.edu.au> Date: 30 Aug 90 23:36:07 GMT References: <208@voodoo.UUCP> Reply-To: drw900@anusf.anu.edu.au Organization: Australian National University Supercomputer Facility Lines: 43 In article , slehar@bucasd.bu.edu (Steve Lehar) writes: |> ........stuff deleted..... |> Now I know that X is designed to run on any hardware, which is why it |> is so complicated, while the SGI stuff only runs on SGI, and that is |> why it is so simple and elegant. Nevertheless, I think SGI did an |> EXCEPTIONAL job in their graphics software, and I would not hurry on |> over to X unless I were absolutely FORCED to do so! X is messy, |> inordinately complicated, atrociously documented and unreliable. (My X |> image windows are prone to suddenly disappearing if they've been |> around for a while) My advice is to stick with SGI! I work in a multi vendor environment and can't wait for SG to go to X. Not to mention the fact that there is LOTS of good public domain software written for X windows(something you can't say about SGI's NeWS). And I like the window managers you get with X eg vtwm. I'm still stuck with the 3.2 X server since the Australian branch won't give us 3.3 yet, and it's driving me around the bend. So full speed ahead on the migration to X. -- /*---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------*/ /* Drew Whitehouse, E-mail: drw900@anusf.anu.edu.au */ /* Visualization Programmer, Fax : (06) 2473425 */ /* Australian National University, Phone : (06) 2495985 */ /* Supercomputer Facility. */ /* GPO Box 4, Canberra ACT Australia 2601. */ /*---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------*/