Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!psuvax1!news From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: NeXT Press Release Message-ID: Date: 1 May 91 20:26:37 GMT References: <47889@ut-emx.uucp> <47946@ut-emx.uucp> <6o6G#_oz1@cs.psu.edu> <48101@ut-emx.uucp> <48163@ut-emx.uucp> <+b5G-i&-1@cs.psu.edu> <48228@ut-emx.uucp> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Organization: Penn State Computer Science Lines: 18 In-Reply-To: greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu's message of 1 May 91 17:15:39 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu In article <48228@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: Well, interface-builders have been around since version 1.1 of the OS, according to a couple people. That's 5 years. In that time, some rather good programs have been written. Still, they haven't gained very widespread use. In groups like comp.sys.amiga.programmer (and its predecessor, comp.sys.amiga.tech) IB style programs have been discussed. Several programmers spoke up at times and said that they didn't need software like that -- that the Amiga's GUI was simple enough to program as it is. I question that I can't answer so maybe you can. Are the Amigas IB's and Objects as refined as the ones on the NeXT? -Mike