Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!randvax!segue!jim
From: jim@segue.segue.com (Jim Balter)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: X11 bashing
Message-ID: <7268@segue.segue.com>
Date: 25 Apr 91 01:18:36 GMT
References: <1991Apr16.210107.41817@eagle.wesleyan.edu> <1991Apr17.040918.12203@Think.COM> <.VXAREE@xds13.ferranti.com> <16818@chaph.usc.edu>
Reply-To: jim@segue.segue.com (Jim Balter)
Organization: Segue Software, Inc. - Santa Monica, CA. +1-213-453-2161
Lines: 26

In article <16818@chaph.usc.edu> jeenglis@alcor.usc.edu (Joe English) writes:
>peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>[Barry Margolin wrote:]
>>> I don't think our image processing and animation people...
>>
>>Animation? Under X? The good animation stuff I've seen has an X-window
>>acting as a mask in front of proprietary high-speed graphics stuff.
>
>If I remember right, the "..." in the >>ed line
>originally read something like "would consider X to be a
>usable environment for their needs."  Why did you ellipsis
>the quote?  It makes it look like you're disagreeing with
>Barry.

No, you are the one who left out the critical context.  Why did you leave it
out?  Why did you put words in Barry's mouth that are the opposite of what
he said?

critical context, to which Barry responded, which Peter included, but
you omitted:

"Very well. I want xterms. Nothing more. I want to be able to pop
open 80x24 windows that emulate vt100s correctly."

Barry made the obvious observation that not everyone fits into that mold.
Peter made the (not so obvious) observation that X isn't enough either.