Xref: utzoo gnu.emacs.help:1402 comp.emacs:10274
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unreplyable!garbage
From: haydens%bullwinkle@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Hayden Schultz)
Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help,comp.emacs
Subject: Re: Alternatives to Motif (a flame)
Message-ID: <9103081422.AA02102@bullwinkle>
Date: 8 Mar 91 14:22:52 GMT
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Followup-To: gnu.emacs.help
Organization: Gatewayed from the GNU Project mailing list help-gnu-emacs@prep.ai.mit.edu
Lines: 13


What's the big deal with Motif anyway? Everything I've read indicates that
there's no significant increase in functunality vs Open Look, and it's a
real pain when developing applications. Independant journals I've read
(I don't remember which one off hand) indicate that there are currently
almost twice as many Open Look applications availible as Motif.

It seems like this issue is yet another example of OSF attempting to
split Unix users into separate camps. Not only that, but users are
willing to pay for the privilige rather than using equivalent free
software.

	Hayden Schultz (haydens@juliet.ll.mit.edu) << respond here please