Xref: utzoo comp.windows.open-look:1631 comp.windows.x:37343
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!jarober
From: jarober@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (DE Robertson james an 740-9172)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.open-look,comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Openwin or X11R4
Keywords: OpenWin X11R4
Message-ID: <1991Jun8.165856.12454@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>
Date: 8 Jun 91 16:58:56 GMT
References: <1991May29.144727.5008@javelin.sim.es.com> <1991Jun01.232522.786@shawn.uucp> <1991Jun3.200112.17129@wlbr.imsd.contel.com> <1991Jun06.060759.420@shawn.uucp> <1991Jun6.150233.7155@javelin.sim.es.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Lines: 16

bgeer@javelin.sim.es.com (Bob Geer) writes:


>It looks like Openwin's idiosyncratic implimentation of X is
>consistent with the otherwise selfish & arrogant attitude reflected in
>the content of McNeeley's address -- any standard, as long as it's
>Sun's.

No more idiosyncratic than Motif's implementation, and possibly more 
consistent due to the tighter 'look and feel' spec. My experience is 
that users prefer whatever they are exposed to first - whether it be
OpenLook, Motif, or Twm. BTW, to say you prefer X11R4 is to say nothing -
the Window Manager gives you the look and feel, not the server. 

James A Robertson
jarober@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu