Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:13327 comp.windows.misc:144
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!benoni
From: benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.windows.misc
Subject: Re: A/UX window systems, Mac toolbox, etc
Message-ID: <1710@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: 28 Feb 88 22:45:39 GMT
References: <4129@hoptoad.uucp> <283@rhesus.primate.wisc.edu>
Organization: Boeing Aerospace Corp., Seattle WA
Lines: 20

In article <283@rhesus.primate.wisc.edu>, bin@rhesus.primate.wisc.edu (Brain in Neutral) writes:
> phil@apple.UUCP (Phil Ronzone, A/UX Technical Manager) wrote:
> > Remember - it is a Mac. Under A/UX or the Mac OS, you have the Toolbox
> > and the Mac look and feel. Ain't nobody else got that ...
  
The toolbox is hardly something to be touting ... the Mac Toolbox lacks the
sophistication of other systems that incorporate network window management
and extensible window servers.  Three years ago this might have been an
appropriate point.
As for the look and feel ... the Mac certainly has made it's contribution
but since it is not licensable and others can't use it... it is being 
by-passed by the remainder of the industry...e.g. SunTools, Presentation 
Manager, Apollo's DM, etc.  Rather it is Apple that is moving more toward
industry standards with NeWS and X sitting on their system.  Writing
an A/UX application using the Mac Toolbox specifically precludes the 
application migrating elsewhere (which in some cases makes sense, but in
most does not if you are interested in portability).

> Which is hardly to demonstrate that it would be impossible or difficult
> to put the Mac look and feel up under some other windowing system.
it's been done...why else did Apple sue DRI for GEM.