Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!imp!diablery.10A.com!devil From: devil@diablery.10A.com (Gil Tene) Newsgroups: comp.windows.open-look Subject: Re: Open Look Toolkits Message-ID: <333@imp.UUCP> Date: 28 Apr 91 17:18:38 GMT References: Sender: devil@imp.UUCP Organization: Diablery, cloud seven, Hell. (also 10A Inc.) Lines: 25 Nntp-Posting-Host: imp In article , grp@magpie.unify.com (Greg Pasquariello) writes: > I think there is the _perception_ that XView is more widely used, but I'm not > sure if that is really the case or not. If it is, then I see a few reasons > why. In addition to those you mention above, XView is freely available, and is > used by those who don't want to buy the libraries. Also, those that use Guide > to develop their interfaces get XView code generated for them. > . > . Don't forget, XView is VERY similar to SunView. Porting SunView apps to XView is MUCH easier than anything else. There are SO MANY SunView apps out there that XView gets a huge automatic start-up share. Being freely available (the only such OL toolkit I know of, or Motif for that matter :-)) helps alot too. XView is definitly less flexible and intrinsics-conformant than OLIT, but it conforms in (programming) style to SunView, which carries ALOT of weight. -- Gil. -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Gil Tene "Some days it just dosn't pay - -- devil%imp@uunet.uu.net to go to sleep in the morning." - -- devil@diablery.10A.com - --------------------------------------------------------------------