Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!voder!pyramid!athertn!Atherton.COM!dlw From: dlw@Atherton.COM (David Williams) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: X11 for the NeXTstation Keywords: X Server, X11, XNeXT, Interpersonal Computing Message-ID: <34009@athertn.Atherton.COM> Date: 9 Jan 91 20:54:22 GMT References: Sender: news@athertn.Atherton.COM Reply-To: dlw@Atherton.COM (David Williams) Organization: Atherton Technology -- Sunnyvale, CA Lines: 30 But, getting back to the real question at hand....What has been changed in 2.0 that breaks XNeXT? How hard would it be to fix it, given the availability of source to it? Is it something that would make one conside just starting over with an R4 implementation? It really doesn't matter if one *hates* X or finds it "Brain Damaged". It is an environment that is pervasive in the Workstation arena and to a small extent, available in the PC and *MACINTOSH* environments. As NeXT is hyping interpersonal computing, X, for all of its problems is just a tool that would be useful to a large class of users, who need it to handle client server computing in a heterogeneous environment. Or who would prefer doing X based development from the comfort of their NeXT machine. From one standpoint it would be *GREAT* if NeXT/Adobe made extensions to Display Postscript/NextStep to allow X to operate on NeXT platforms...as Sun has done with regard to SunTools/X with the OpenWindows 2.0 server. You'll notice that at the hardware level NeXT's floppy drive will accomodate PC floppies (and eventually Mac formatted floppys one would hope), in the interest of data sharing...support for the X Window Server would be an equivalent in the software world. As evidenced by the development of XNeXT, technically this is not something that would overly tax the R&D of NeXT. NeXT has been rather quiet on the internet of late, one would hope that in any case they have been following discussions like this. David Williams