Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!seismo!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: OPEN LOOK announced first (was: Re: Motif/Openlook, is there a trend?
Message-ID: <5708@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 4 Feb 91 19:16:24 GMT
References: <2977@sodium.ATT.COM> <1991Jan30.211330.12990@sq.sq.com> <1991Feb3.025211.8461@alphalpha.com>
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 53

>Does _Sun_ even claim to support anything other than XView?  I doubt
it.

Well, with OW 2.0, you get XView *and* OLIT; you also get a buglist file
for OLIT (admittedly, a small one), so they may support it in the sense
that they'll file away bug reports for it - dunno which they schedule to
fix in house and which they feed to AT&T.

>Their version of libXt.a has pathnames that point at /usr/lib/X11, but
>the version of SunOS4.0 I've used doesn't even have that directory.
>That doesn't look like support to me.

More relevantly, the version that comes with OW 2.0 points at
"/usr/lib/X11" but OW 2.0 doesn't provide such a directory; the pointers
should point at "/usr/openwin/lib", unless they provide a symlink to
that in "/usr/lib/X11".

>* OSF, Visix (private toolkit, I once asked about buying it and was told
>they might consider it, but only for multi-millions),

A recent posting somewhere indicated that they may sell it, or sell
*some* toolkit; no price was mentioned, so they may well charge multiple
millions for it:

  From: amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker)
  Newsgroups: comp.windows.misc
  Subject: Re: Macintosh vs. X windows
  Message-ID: <1991Feb3.071036.12701@visix.com>
  Date: 3 Feb 91 07:10:36 GMT
  Organization: Visix Software Inc., Reston, VA

  In article <1991PMSat.02.14347@dircon.co.uk> uad1077@dircon.co.uk
  (Ian Kemmish) writes:
  >Also, much effort is wasted on
  >fighting the toolkit (this may be implementation rather than design bugs
  >in the version of Motif I was using, but it's still relevant to the
  >choice of whether to use it in future!).

  The common problem I've seen with most X toolkits is that they contain
  a lot of preconceptions about How Every Application Shall Be Structured,
  and tend to have very narrow APIs.  The Mac, whatever faults it may have,
  has a very broad and general API.

  There is, of course, no reason that a broad API can't be built on top
  of X--it's just that there are very few of them around, and even fewer
  are for sale to the public.

  Disclaimer: We have built such a toolkit, and we will be selling it this
	    summer.  I am therefore biased on this issue.
  -- 
  Amanda Walker						amanda@visix.com
  Toolkit Team Leader				  ...!uunet!visix!amanda
  Visix Software Inc.					 +1 800 832 8668