Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!att!dptg!sodium!esg From: esg@sodium.ATT.COM (Edward Gokhman) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: OPEN LOOK announced first (was: Re: Motif/Openlook, is there a trend? Message-ID: <2995@sodium.ATT.COM> Date: 7 Feb 91 15:12:11 GMT References: Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Lincroft, NJ Lines: 29 From article , by toml@marvin.Solbourne.COM (Tom LaStrange): > > > In addition, I feel more confident that the Motif sources I > get will work and be as hardware independent as possible. > > Some people will view a single toolkit as an advantage, others will think > that a choice of toolkits is the way to go. You are obviously in the single > toolkit camp while I'm in the multiple toolkit camp. At least our window > system allows us the choice. Exactly. Also it is not always a case of likes and dislikes - it all depends on what hat you are wearing. If you are an independent software vendor you most likely to hook up with the wood behind the Sun's arrow - SPARC/SVR4/OpenWindow platform. The market share is a magic magnet in software business. The choice of OpenLook toolkits is a critical advantage. The XView toolkit allows for a migration of over 2,800 (!) existing SunView applications. Such a migration is not really automatic, although in some primitive cases you may succeed, but it is a reasonably easy one. This allows Sun to move from supporting suntools to concentrating on OpenLook toolkits: XView, OLIT, and TNT. The TNT toolkit for NeWS, which replaced the "Light" toolkit or NeWS 1.1, is a really neat thing, and the ability to access simultanuously X and a full-blown "red book" PostScript impresses the hell out of me. --Ed G.