Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cyb-eng.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!mordor!ut-sally!cyb-eng!bc
From: bc@cyb-eng.UUCP (Bill Crews)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.micro.atari,net.micro.mac,net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <750@cyb-eng.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Oct-85 17:06:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: cyb-eng.750
Posted: Wed Oct 16 17:06:54 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Oct-85 00:39:04 EDT
References: <282@graffiti.UUCP> <1147@Shasta.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: Cyb Systems, Austin, TX
Lines: 23
Xref: watmath net.micro.pc:5671 net.micro.atari:1432 net.micro.mac:3058 net.micro.amiga:438

> > 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.

Good point!  However, I like the object-orientation of the STAR Desktop and
wish that SOMEONE would make it available in a consumer-affordable form,
since Xerox apparently refuses to do so.
-- 
	- bc -

..!{seismo,topaz,gatech,nbires,ihnp4}!ut-sally!cyb-eng!bc  (512) 835-2266