Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x.motif:2189 comp.windows.x:34087 comp.windows.ms:10381
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!geac!alias!mherman
From: mherman@alias.UUCP (Michael Herman)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x.motif,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.ms,alias.r+d
Subject: Re: Summary: Evaulation of XVT
Message-ID: <1991Mar14.144807.22949@alias.uucp>
Date: 14 Mar 91 14:48:07 GMT
References: <1991Mar7.180217.18505@cimage.com>
Sender: news@alias.uucp (USENET News)
Organization: Alias Research, Inc. Toronto ON Canada
Lines: 30

I have recently attended an XVT Programming course and am, personally,
very impressed with the product and believe that there is great benefit to
be derived for (most) any GUI application that needs to run across
multiple platforms.

Rather than address/correct the specific comments made in the
"Evaluation", I think it is more important to understand background of the
founders of XVT and the philosophy behind XVT (i.e. to have the "right"
frame of mind).

The founders come from Bell Labs.  Rochkind spent some 12 years there
working with all the famous Bell Labs people.  Meier has similar
experience.  Rochkind worked with the people that created the C
programming language and when you begin to understand XVT, you'll
recognize that the philosophy behind XVT is the same one that made the C
programming language successful for creating all sorts of applications
across a large variety of platforms.  I think the important thing to
understand is:

"XVT is to native windows systems as C is to assembly language. - Meier"

I hope this makes sense and doesn't sound too much like hype.  If XVT is
to be faulted, I think they could be doing a better job of communicating
(read "marketing") this message.

Caveat: I have only read through some XVT applications, taken the course
and talked (at length) with a couple of the people from XVT.  I haven't
written any XVT programs.

These comments are entirely my own.