Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!hsdndev!think.com!samsung!uunet!aplcomm!capd.jhuapl.edu!waltrip From: waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: XNeXT on NextStep 2.0????? Message-ID: <1991Mar11.164644.1@capd.jhuapl.edu> Date: 11 Mar 91 21:46:44 GMT References: <1991Mar5.232508.20719@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> <1991Mar7.140806.13975@wam.umd.edu> , Sender: news@aplcomm.JHUAPL.EDU Organization: CAPVAX, JHU/APL Lines: 46 In article , jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremy G. Mereness) writes: [...] > As I understand it, NeXT is being very unfriendly as far as telling > people what they need to know about writing alternative window > servers... except for the folks who are writing CoXist which has to be > paid $$$ for. I believe this has been rebutted by a number of people in previous postings...including the good folks at McGill who have given you a free X11R4 so now you can go ahead and buy your NeXT:^) > I thought one idea behind X was that it was to be public > domain (read: free). ^^^^^^^^^^ No, MIT's X development was sponsored by commercial interests (e.g., DEC, HP, IBM) who were interested in promoting a standard that would help them sell workstations. As it happens, the standard was embodied in sample servers (not reference servers) and toolkits which helped the rapid widespread acceptance of X as a de facto standard. Thus, X was often "free" on a number of platforms but the vendors were left with plenty of room to offer value-added (read: more efficient, supported and integrated) products. Products such as CoXist are quite consistent with the aims of the X project and with the aims of a company such as NeXT which is interested in having people offer software that helps them sell workstations. In particular, note that CoXist (this is my understanding from other posters--I have no first- hand knowledge) is integrated into the NeXT environment rather than existing as a separate environment into which toggles back and forth. A NeXT/CoXist user is thus able to co-exist naturally in both environments...a feature of significant value to many of us although for many others, the free implementation originating at McGill is a tremendous service which provides needed functionality. The MIT strategy has been tremendously successful in gaining acceptance of X. A comparable strategy for NeXTstep would probably require something like Adobe developing a number of Display PostScript controllers for popular architectures and distributing a generic NeXTstep source AND a generic X server that used DPS. Sample implementations for popular platforms would have to be included. I'm not suggesting that this strategy would be successful...only that it would be comparable in scope to what was done by MIT. c.f.waltrip Internet: Opinions expressed are my own.