Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x:33171 comp.windows.x.motif:2011 comp.windows.open-look:679 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!shelby!msi.umn.edu!s13.msi.umn.edu!zoo From: zoo@aps1.spa.umn.edu (david d [zoo] zuhn) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.motif,comp.windows.open-look Subject: Re: Toolkit for Open Look *and* OSF/Motif Look and Feel Message-ID: Date: 23 Feb 91 19:28:31 GMT References: <1057@attc.UUCP> <1991Feb19.210822.26826@visix.com> <1991Feb20.170617.15372@cs.umn.edu> <1991Feb20.194928.3022@Solbourne.COM> <1991Feb21.184826.11191@alphalpha.com> Sender: news@s1.msi.umn.edu Reply-To: zoo@aps1.spa.umn.edu Organization: Minnesota Automated Plate Scanner Lab Lines: 26 In-Reply-To: nazgul@alphalpha.com's message of 21 Feb 91 18:48:26 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: grumpy.spa.umn.edu >>>>> On 21 Feb 91 18:48:26 GMT, nazgul@alphalpha.com (Kee Hinckley) said: Kee> This stuff about being able to do two GUIs is nonsense. Not because Kee> it isn't possible. Not because it isn't easy. But simply because Kee> WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO DO IT! It's a waste of time, resources and it Kee> hurts the industry. Well, I agree with you entirely on that one. I assume that you are now going to drop all of your Motif support and move over into the OL camp. Supporting multiple UI's doesn't hurt the industry any more so than any one side being declared the winner and the opponents being relegated to /dev/null before they've fully duked it out. There are valid reasons for supporting Motif. There are valid reasons for supporting OL. The previous two sentences are valid reasons for supporting work like OI which gives the user a chance to choose. I don't want this to turn into yet another my-GUI-blows-your-GUI-out-of- the-water discussion, which will lead nowhere. Let's continue discussion about how we can support multiple GUI's in a single API. david d [zoo] zuhn Univ. of Minnesota Dept. of Astronomy zoo@aps1.spa.umn.edu Automated Plate Scanner Project