Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!helios!n025fc From: n025fc@tamuts.tamu.edu (Kevin Weller) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: Motif/Openlook, is there a trend? Message-ID: Date: 24 Jan 91 00:28:05 GMT References: <426@yonder.UUCP> <1991Jan23.164403@ecovsb.ncsu.edu> Sender: usenet@helios.TAMU.EDU Organization: Texas A&M University, Computer Science Department Lines: 35 In-reply-to: willis@ecovsb.ncsu.edu's message of 23 Jan 91 22:04:03 GMT In article <1991Jan23.164403@ecovsb.ncsu.edu> willis@ecovsb.ncsu.edu (Bill Willis) writes: [paragraph deleted] If I specify vendor supported Motif in a purchase specification I get responses from lots of vendors of machines utilizing different architectures... Lots of options to choose from in terms of performance range, architecture, risc/cisc, etc. I can make my decision based on who can help me the most and support my needs. The list includes some large vendors with a long history of product support and service. If I specify OpenWindows I get a response from Sun and ^^^^^^^^^^^ a few Sparc clones. No options, no choices... [several paragraphs deleted] Bill Willis, Director willis@ecovsa.ncsu.edu Engineering Computer Operations willis%ecovsa@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu Box 7901, School of Engineering North Carolina State University (919) 737-2458 We have met the enemy, and they are us --- Pogo I think this discussion is about Motif vs. Open Look, not Motif vs. OpenWindows. Open Look and Open Windows are two entirely different animals, and your response from vendors regarding the former might be better than that for the latter. -- Kevin L. Weller /-------+--------------------\ internet: n025fc@tamuts.tamu.edu | aTm | GIG 'EM, AGGIES! | CIS: 73327,1447 \-------+--------------------/