Xref: utzoo comp.windows.news:290 comp.windows.misc:93
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!portal!atari!daisy!klee
From: klee@daisy.UUCP (Ken Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news,comp.windows.misc
Subject: Re: Best window system & Why
Message-ID: <828@daisy.UUCP>
Date: 5 Feb 88 22:16:11 GMT
References: <8802031910.AA28124@ll-sst.arpa>
Reply-To: klee@daisy.UUCP (Ken Lee)
Organization: Daisy Systems Corp., Mountain View, Ca.
Lines: 28

This discussion so far has mainly discussed the differences between
window manager user interfaces, not the window systems themselves.  I'd
be interested in hearing what people have to say about the deeper
issues.  Here are some things that concern me right now:

1.  The NeWS server is completely and dynamically extensible.  At any
time, the client can download functions or programs for the server to
execute.  In X, these functions must all run on the client side (also
possible in NeWS, but not necessary), thus requiring much more
communication between the client and sever.  Extensibility is especially
important for fast mouse interaction and sophisticated graphics output
(such as 3D).  The NeWS language is object-oriented, with a lightweight
process capability, to make the programming easy.  Yes, I've heard about
the limited compile-time extensibility of X, mainly that it doesn't
really work.

2. The NeWS interface to C sucks.  The X interface to C is much nicer,
with a rich Xlib and Xtk.  SunView 2.0 for NeWS has been mentioned on
the net, but I haven't seen it yet.

3. I've heard people complain about X's limited usefulness with future,
advanced hardware, while NeWS should be easily extended.  I'm not
really familiar with this issue, but would appreciate other people's
comments.

Thanks.

Ken