Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!exodus!appserv!slovax.Eng.Sun.COM!lm From: lm@slovax.Eng.Sun.COM (Larry McVoy) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: X11 bashing Message-ID: <558@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 24 Apr 91 20:42:43 GMT References: <16818@chaph.usc.edu> Sender: news@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, CA. Lines: 36 jeenglis@alcor.usc.edu (Joe English) writes: > peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > > >The problem is that [X's designers] were factoring the problem > >apart along the wrong > >lines. They implemented basic drawing primitives and assumed that was good > >enough. What they needed to be implementing was visual objects: buttons, > >text panes, windows, etc. > > I think this is one of the things X definitely does right. > It allows for much greater flexibility in UI style and policy. > X is still used extensively for UI research, so this flexibility > is important. I think that this is a trap, a typical Computer "Science" sort of pitfall. All your college professors will tell you about separation of policy and mechanism like it is some sort of manna from heaven. In the area of user interface this is, in my opinion, the worst possible thing that could be done. It is worse than having a bad, but consistent, user interface. Think carefully before you flame me - think hard about the Mac. The reason that *users* like the Mac is due, in part, to the consistent look and feel of the user interface. You may not like it, but you remember how it works. X blew it by handing out all that mechanism to developers. It would have been much better if they took a little longer and came up w/ the same set of functionality that the Mac (even the early Mac) had. Then all the apps would look the same, work the same. The toolkits were only a weak attempt. What X has done is similar to providing the source for libc and telling you to write ls. Every implementation of ls has different options and a different look and feel *to implement the same function*. Most bogus. --- Larry McVoy, Sun Microsystems (415) 336-7627 ...!sun!lm or lm@sun.com