Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site Shasta.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!Glacier!Shasta!gus
From: gus@Shasta.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.micro.atari,net.micro.mac,net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <1147@Shasta.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 14-Oct-85 14:23:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: Shasta.1147
Posted: Mon Oct 14 14:23:17 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 15-Oct-85 08:11:56 EDT
References: <282@graffiti.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 15
Xref: linus net.micro.pc:5335 net.micro.atari:1307 net.micro.mac:2945 net.micro.amiga:4254

> Apropos to this... could anyone post the addresses (physical) to send
> impassioned pleas for intelligence and imagination in the changes to
> GEM, Intuition, and so on? There was a suggestion that we test the power
> of USENET by creating Cheese Triscuits. How about saving it for
> something more useful: either getting Apple to back down on this new idiocy
> or getting AMIGA and DRI to implement the STAR desktop instead of the
> MAC desktop & give Apple the finger. The AMIGA is very close as it is.

Why can't DRI make the GEM desktop? If you all want to send letters to DRI
giving suggestions for the "new" GEM look, that's all well and good, but
there is still plenty of room for creativity in window oriented interfaces
without stepping on someone elses toes. I see Sun Windows, Microsoft Windows,
Xerox Cedar, and Xerox Smalltalk as four different interpretations of the
desktop metaphor which look nothing like the Mac. If there is anyone lackiing
is creativity, it's DRI.