Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pa.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!netrix.nac.dec.com!lan_csse
From: lan_csse@netrix.nac.dec.com (CSSE LAN Test Account)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X11 Windows 3.0 comparisons
Message-ID: <22545@shlump.lkg.dec.com>
Date: 8 May 91 21:20:01 GMT
References: <9105061352.AA20328@smithkline.com>
Sender: news@shlump.lkg.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment
Lines: 21

In article <9105061352.AA20328@smithkline.com> wood%lavc3.dnet@smithkline.COM (Bill Wood, SB Pharmaceuticals R&D, 215-270-5163) writes:
>In article <261@picker.picker.com>, kobetitsch@picker.picker.com (harry 
>kobetitsch) writes:
>>A heated battle rages on in my work group. I would like 
>>some pros and cons of X (including Motif) and Windows 3.0.
>>I would like facts to back up an argument on either side.
>>
...
>
>How hard is this to do in X, especially pasting color bitmaps between apps and
>automating the whole process?  I believe that MS Windows provides a rich, 
>standard environment, and that as it becomes available on faster machines and 
>richer operating systems, the flood of applications for it will be amazing.

So when can we expect to see a mswm and a MS3lib.a on some Unix platforms?
MS Windows couldn't very well imitate X and Unix, but there's no inherent
reason that those who like MS Windows and DOS shouldn't be able to compile
and link on Unix, and have it look and feel like their favorite PC.  Why
all this either-orism?

(Aside from the look-and-feel lawsuits, of course. ;-)